ethdciliee nt ak pik ee 
Wa Sr τι σον 


v= ee me - tree ee a et Se 
hd . wie a tibetan r= es SN ἂν Ald ---ς γε πεν σώ ad 4 « ΝΣ 
- bmg a a , ae pols ΜΞ lie (ὦ : i Me et rn a ine ae ~ ε 
— τον δῶν al aa a eo oe ms acute te Wry ΣΑΣ vor hee eink μι θαδ᾽ ἀθαμη a LER MNT rie ως ~ Ko προσπε ιρ . τ a 
ae ee erin ΤΩΣ ier re τῷ παν σνεν reine oe ged svete wage νυ ΩΣ μὰ, ἡ γόνυ! μὰν © iba oe ne 
“= ides. kan a ΕΣ ade Ὁ BE a eee Wiese wee © “ὄνον 
τ τ Fash) ies ee oF th OP at Oe eee. a ψ ὦ νν αίόνν ~ 
ae he Sahl Ἵ ζ Sad δι. ἀ - 
— δυο fe ty 


ti, die ae ‘ 
eines dcthaeeee ee Ἐν 
= ν ne Ἅ oa ἊΝ > Bdiibamoncase 
~ rine ott το a em en eS 
ie - ith ὦ δος ον, ΤΥ ΡΝ ᾿ς ρος ΣᾺΣ ariew metpngrantiey strobe ere 
- -- ν pa main -» balla gyn. etalon νῶν 4. en tte latter conn “ρα ὦ, a WR Menage Nene i iinet ὅς. ον, dit agen nde ἡ δΩς 
- Siesta one ee καν hills, φορὰ deaths a ee “πο τὸς πα σιτίον πῶς ας πα τος πόα τὰς τὴς δος ἐς ere A ος en . Oe 
μον Oh cigs tani et ee -΄..«-.-- Papa ᾿ “ἀφ ρον es ζω ΝΣ ἔα ἡ “- » - “ 
* < πων talc Nien ee ites ieee 3 «alee ne aes ererayd ten ae 6 a nh ere more ene tee — ee See 
6, Sars Sirti sh) eae ee) Pas i, hadi. ome ~ ΟΣ να ~~ se poe ne 7 —r - 7 
Seth ἣν νὼ di, doen διλνα, ὦ pO αι hin. alin τ ϑϑδῷ τῆν ? “ “we 
tit Rt pe talon ape al - 
> ~ 
Ψ -- 
μι “ . 
new 
re ee 
— “τον 
μὰ 
Ὁ ὅν... 
- ayer 
—— μ > ἀραιόν τ τον: 40 
“ »- - o~ ᾿ ι-- 
Ἐν κε Φ.. ip 
~ νι b - 4 νὰ τ gad - 
ἐς. — Ay ee md ae ee ond 
Ὄ = - ΡῈ Ὅν Ψ' μεν 
a qin m κί τς. a aiid - a ellen 7 ~~. 
- . - τος τς Rages en 
»-"Ψθῳ, =e. . “a al al ο 
mt, ταν - . . ie ae ya > aeipedinle πο πος OF ie δε Me Be 
oe, = ye ᾿ μ φῦ» ὦ - PE a τς ὐφῷγυ», δου ae ee nas ann bee 
. pond fon 5 ‘ oe dite ee yee a ow ST OP ara “ὦ ~ en enapetonee ΚΣ hee ne eee ἐς, ον a a 
- ι ᾿ » ᾿, eee tn ee ne ra Acedia aie Rg ern eee. να 4 "αι. φυ-υῷ -ν -itine-tnabimded Dea og Par χρῆν ἣν ὡς See eee 
τυ otha ee eam he dee dee en Oe oe ee ee it igi κα ἐν dite ἃ Nar gly eet wa [ile . = EAB yoy Menge ye eye 
= .᾿ 5 δ » iene Der, nachna rane chen ee Ee Reno ὁ ας ets νη 5. are Ge  -.σ....’ me oP Rade A — nada ipl ci 
hastened ieee oo tind, ἐμάν dae ee όσα Δ a ale set en μα. υϑυφσ αι» — cs ee Ottis ade ἀπο το 
Ait hi τον ert erg Pm ee ter war: - δ, aed ων lo Magithen να, a eee 
Sogn wher were ene = res ese ones στῶν, - ΩΣ Στ ae 
; “δ᾽ ple τον αΐ,, αὐ "ὦ Mtns ra 4 Ὁ La one as ow ᾿ . yer hoe sh ea 
ary o-~whiea woe a ἮΝ hin ean ta npn E 
oP emerges ae toe aa eee > ὧν. —inan - ~ μή ὦ EF erm 
: " a “ « " 4 παρ σις, dita 2 i γον τος 
> = eh a Se art ro τρονυδυτ σου,  ορτ ον ῳ» ene 
4. ἊΨ am μι, ew Mh. th dietitian ee 
~ _ onion a a irl onion apto aguas 
‘ = “Ὁ ~ ep cee a tine .itiha, 
- ἊΨ. ~ -_< -ν + PN? ὦ ΡΟΝ ee να 
δ - > * Kidedies aeaeen nen 
Mme x ra ne, ρα edie me ὙΠ: mires a hang 
‘ 5 at, “τ Aediina ΄ ‘owe lle sean οὐ κίνς 
* - ν te “4 - 
= - ; a eons ᾿ ements eta th cant 
- τῷ." - “ = “w Nats rene 
. ῳ a ee 4 -- pad Ὁ" gh bo 
7 ee πὰρ _ a mw δ... co ee Wee 
~ - * ~—% SF PY PTT rey Be: 20, ον eee 
~ p a. ~ 5 . ore Φ' hat bone ϑου ee 
~ =~ . _ * — Se ee bd 
- ᾿ at age aad Ma Ps ϑ neh le κως ee ene 
> e- = : -Ὡ Δωρ -- 
= ἃ : ; Rates oor lee Poi Oa bene pag ee eat 
- “ "κ᾿ er?" ae . em “ry a ee ta at ee 3 Velde ee 
= Υ -- : ~-w mang <r ταν Ses trae an ἀνα tee eee 
᾿ νλῳςς ἐσ a > ra os Ae war hel ars βύφενδτοιήφ σα, wrong κ ον 
νὰ Ὁ ων om : cae ΟΣ vt prague a Ψ πὰ νὰ orn, aN ὧς δον Ret ncaa Mai ἃν oe 
are ν pd “-- ~ Se eB Saree wy MA seb ΝΣ oe Mad Ψ Whe Tete ieee per? ΜΝ ον Maia Ἢ GE SEEN ier een τόσο γε. 
᾽ " ~ Chew ag aeee — ν * »- 2 hag ene ee or Υ “ \iculb slahinals il healed ~ ON A al . μον νὰ Δ ὦ "ον θυ is ee ὑ6.- 
ἣν ΣΈΟ τλγσεν τῶν. τ παν γτεινῃμενγῦ ween oe es να σας, a On nln ἀφο μα ῶς, + Ny on A nd heen inchiaaed ot hee ᾿ς μάνας. eases τις ile hie rtd ea ed go 
, 5. ωφ. Se ey τ bashes ἊΨ ibd Ass amet ae eRe wy” ie Si ΩΣ ρον ΚΑ A td αν ΡΨ. ον ον κ΄ς, PE OOO omg ~ eee ie eo ee mer ed rhe el Ae a eS vee se a oe 
ure Pe sige ww ity wie at a ben et ΤΌΣΑ SOP Minas Soe ee he OO the ns i Vt ον ῥόδο, πῶ, ag tes, eteded “dna a ee ~~ — Ree Redd Ln oe ok Ube ae tee * FE Rr gy bs i nes Sea dea σύδω νῷ ἑδν ς eet δαςς ᾧ 
εν μά ἀν a rl ee og ety Wenge ΣῪ, σφ γος es κε. νῦν ψ' Ce am dint «anni πού ι, Mine ἈΣΤῊΝ νχψιω U0 =e ae Ὑ πος 1) ἰχ πόσο. ae αν . τ ὑμὴν. κα “ὩΣ “να ie de φρα,. 
δος το τι oT Te EET gee win ee MF saa dese eee Sa ae pn oe Se ree a pon ce OE ea oe eae Msg ae tant ae oh ag pane ee ae ee eae oe 
ro ot tak ee ee ων» New Fete, es > a ite ton hen -“ροῴἰ'᾽ΘωἀἊῳῳ4 owe . tt “a oy ἐπ αι “ ᾿ς - we = Dareeraa tlhe ar = Gan ᾽ ogg 
wie tech na μεν ἃ καὶ eo el ΤΣ τ a elaine sh tases δῆ Te eee ect eee $a τὴν ΩΝ ee eee vO δου; Soo mares Mh ot pbs ον τς IR Pats Sa 
: δος, aes De Nk. ee Εν ie ; ἐὰν ον ΟΣ ΔΑ (χ᾽ q ‘ss re Μ ἣν ο᾿κ ΤᾺΝ ΣΧ ΣῊ" " φν ‘ a os . μ᾿ 
ἀνα, ες aia ὩΣ, abd be reeled these eee ων. eee κυρίῳ «αὶ νως τος μος τορι tne ὦ eas ΣΤΥ ΣΤ Ce a to vwhrtg easy a Gi ΧΩ 
ait piece Ae τῶ. enya as β- A =~ oy ap δι τ 
ER a eae ee ee OTS ee ae bay Atte Nestle teeth edad Be atl a rie bee: aa ον Ἀν er iat ae 
nai > cn apne te τς ανπον τα 
ies a 
+ 


ney ( 
Pragya ord ortarpeandal eee armen ee =~ 
ewer " τας ΟΝ per ν Ἣν 
See el wie netuny ave ἀμδεώμῳς.. rae at 4 * ‘ wor vr 
ear OeT Sabai ge ates aye wee μον "᾿ we 
4 ᾿ Εν ΣΦ τος ΄.»» 


2 

πες Se ger ee ae ee 

* ere eo: em 
c Are. Five ~ - re ne ee ee 
οι ΠΤ Pe Oe ΤῊ ΤῈ Ne Fir το phan ya τον νἀ σα Aa ΤΣ 
us ie ἊΝ er PA n αν ow 

. — ᾿ abot yt sa tarbunat ah «διῶ, Ow t-Dubereh ate ple betwiiEeeyeketsardedense oes. _ = 

a er ὑσ τον ως, that a ὧὴ δ kant 
ene te wees. 


~ τ 


‘howe 
ree 
Ζ ς : 
φῶ Ὁ - Μὰ Hy 
νας ΟΣ ᾿ ᾿ 
“ ΡΒ he 
νιν Ϊ 
= ω 
a. 2 
. » 
. yy — 
΄ ν ~ 
* 
ae τρο es 
- 


τῷ ~ = “ * τῶν ΄ "- ey, ae i ~ = i S303 res 
ee πξα τος Cis ΠΣ en ΩΣ eee aay 


wn, - 


“ἢ 

ΩΝ 

ε. ον , 
Γ᾿ 

ξ i 
vt 

i 

- 

nH 

Ἵ 

‘ “ak 

ΠῚ fi 
4 

| 

“4 
"ἢ 

+ 

wad | 


¢ Ps. νὰ 
mn Pad 
era er Ge Ga 


——_—————$S$ —— SS Ὁ ΟΠ ΒΝΒὄἝΜὦὄὝπΝὄσΝὌἌἭΨΟΝΩΝ 


Ses So eee 


—— 


: 
-ὦ 


” 
he , 
mre ora 


Ἃ 


» 


ye . 
᾿ 


a ὋΝ THE CROWN 


= 


Γ 


wee ba 
δ ἫΝ tae 
a) Og Peet 


ὁ 


London: C. J. CLAY anp SONS, 
“CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS WAREHOUSE, 


AVE MARIA LANE. 
Glasgow: 50, WELLINGTON STREET. 


Leipsig: F. A. BROCKHAUS., 
few Work: THE MACMILLAN COMPANY. 
Bombay: E. SEYMOUR HALE, 


AHMOSOENOYS ΠΕΡΙ TOY STE®ANOY 


PeevliOsTHENEDS 
ON THE CROWN 


WITH CRITICAL AND EXPLANATORY NOTES 
AN HISTORICAL SKETCH 
AND ESSAYS 


Ay 


WILLIAM WATSON GOODWIN 


Hon. LL.D. anv D.C.L. 
ELIOT PROFESSOR OF GREEK LITERATURE IN HARVARD UNIVERSITY 


ΠΣ ΤΟΣ THE SYNDICS OF THE UNIVERSITY PRESS 


BOSTON COLLEGE LIBRARY 
CHESTNUT HILL, Mass, 


CAMBRIDGE 
AT THE UNIVERSITY PRESS 


IQOI 


[All Rights reserved] 


Cambrivge: 
PRINTED BY J. AND C. F. CLAY, 
AT THE UNIVERSITY PRESS. 


ee : a 

ἮΝ ill lar Sel oi 

a i 

ΤΩΣ 
᾿Ξ, 

; ἐν 

¥ ᾧ 
‘ 


TO 


| HENRY: JACKSON 


IN TOKEN OF 


ary 


PREFACE. 


IN this edition of Demosthenes on the Crown I have 
attempted to supply students with what I deem most essential 
to a thorough understanding of this masterpiece of oratory. 
No mere commentary, however learned and lucid, can make 
a speech like this intelligible to those who have not a full and 
accurate knowledge of the events which are discussed, and of 
their relation to other events. No adequate treatment of 
historical points is possible in scattered notes, and references to 
a general history (even to Grote or Curtius) are not sufficient, 
The student of Demosthenes needs a connected narrative, in 
which he will find a detailed account of the events which 
especially concern him, with copious references to the authorities, 
without being distracted by other details in which he has no 
immediate interest. To meet this want, I have given a large 
space to an “ Historical Sketch” of the period from the acces- 
sion of Philip to the battle of Chaeronea, in which I have en- 
larged disproportionately on the events and questions discussed 
in. the orations of Demosthenes and Aeschines on the Crown 
and on the Embassy, and have alluded slightly (or perhaps 
not at all) to many important matters which are not essential 
to the study of these speeches. This would be unpardonable 
in a history: but this sketch assumes a general knowledge of 
the history of the period which it covers, and makes no pretence 
to being such a history in itself. With this ἃ view, I have given 


what may seem undue prominence to the negotiations which 
led to the Peace of Philocrates; for a minute knowledge of these 
is Besolutely necessary to a correct understanding of the brief 


vill PREFACE. 


but cogent argument of Demosthenes in Cor. §§ 17—52, and to 
a fair judgment of the whole political course of both Demos- 
thenes and Aeschines at this decisive crisis in the history of 
Athens. Much new light has been thrown upon the whole 
period which ‘I have treated from inscriptions recently dis- 
covered by the French explorers at Delphi and from the Corpus 
Inscriptionum Atticarum. In preparing this sketch I have made 
constant use of Grote and of Schaefer’s Demosthenes und Seine 
Zeit, as my references will show. 

In revising the text I have in most cases followed the 
authority of the Codex %, especially when it is supported by 
its companion 1... See Essay vil. In preparing the com- 
mentary I have been constantly aided by the long line of 
editors, whose names are too familiar to need mention. I must, 
however, express my great obligation to Westermann and Blass, 
especially for references to parallel passages and to other illus- 
trations. I have found it impossible to give credit for every 
remark and reference which may be borrowed from these or 
other recent editors: many of these are found in the notes of 
Dissen and the older editors, and many have long been in my 
own collection of notes. Nothing is harder to trace than old 
references, and most of those relating to Demosthenes on the 
Crown may now be assumed to be common property. 

I take great pleasure in expressing (not for the first time) 
my deep indebtedness to Dr Henry Jackson of Trinity College, 
Cambridge. He has done me the inestimable service of reading 
and revising my proofs and giving me the benefit of his wide 
experience. There are few pages in this book which have not 
had the benefit of his criticism. | 

Notwithstanding the size of this volume, I have omitted the 
discussion of many interesting questions, especially some which 
‘belong to the whole subject of Attic oratory rather than to the 
study of a single oration. One of these relates to the rhythmical 
character of the language of Demosthenes, which could not be 
treated briefly or incidentally. I must refer those who are 
interested in this to Blass, Adtische Beredsamékett, il. 1, pp. 105 
—141, with the Anhang. 

I have avoided many discussions of grammatical points in 


PREFACE. ΙΧ 


the notes by references to my Syntax of the Greek Moods and 
Tenses (M. T.), and I have occasionally referred to my Greek 
Grammar (G.). The references to Grote IX.—xI. are made to 
the first edition ; those to earlier volumes to the second edition. 
Those to Schaefer's Demosthenes are to the second edition; and 
those to Boeckh’s Staatshaushaltung der Athener to the third 
edition by Frankel (1886). 

1 have made no attempt to be neutral on the question of the 
patriotism and the statesmanship of Demosthenes in his policy 
of uncompromising resistance to Philip. It seems to me that 
the time for such neutrality is past. I cannot conceive how any 
one who knows and respects the traditions of Athens, and all 
that she represents in the long contest of free institutions against 
tyranny, can read the final attack of Aeschines and the reply of 
Demosthenes without feeling that Demosthenes always stands 

forth as a true patriot and statesman, who has the best interests 
of his country at heart and upholds her noblest traditions, while 
Aeschines appears first as a trimmer and later as an intentional 
(if not a corrupt) ally of Philip in his contest with Athens. 
That the policy of resistance to Philip’s aggressions failed at last 
is no discredit to the patriotism or the statesmanship of Demos- 
thenes. Can any one, even at this day, read the pathetic and 
eloquent appeal of Demosthenes to posterity in Cor. §§ 199— 
208, and not feel that Athens would have been unworthy of her 
glorious past if she had submitted to Philip without a struggle 
for liberty, even if Chaeronea and all its consequences had been 
seen by her in advance? Her course was plain: that of De- 
mosthenes was even plainer. 


W. W. GOODWIN. 


HARVARD UNIVERSITY, 
CAMBRIDGE, MASS., 
November 15, 1900. 


sD og 


CONTENTS. 


om Accession of Philip to 352 z.c. 


Life of Demosthenes. —Events from 352 to 


Peace of ΡΝ 
ars of nominal Peace, Bee B.C. 


= War ie Philip, from 340 B.C. to the Battle of 
a in 338 B.C. 


a richie of Dates 
an Attic Year 


t of the igi with remarks on §§ 120, 


ae ΓΝ 
Suit against Ctesiphon 


Ἢ Beehines and Pllocrates in 343 BC. . 


in the Manuscripts of Demos- 


PAGES 
3—6 


7—227 


229—234 


234—242 
242—268 
268—285 


285-—-299 
300—305 


395—307 


308—316 
316—327 
327—332 
332—337 
338—339 
339—342 
343—350 


350—355 
357—368 


δ». μι. 7 - = 
᾿ 4 = 
ἈΝ, " Ἢ Ἢ 
=." Α͂ ΤΥ λ , 
a ἣν ᾿ 
7 , 
J 
= 
a - mi ΓΝ 
a 
: ΠΣ 
᾽ 
ΒᾺΝ 
ὧν 
Ε s 
7 
: 
-“ 


ἘΒΕΑΤΑ ΗΝ if 
Page 148, Notes, col. 1; 1. 2, read Ve ΞΡ 


oo” 150, ” ” Li Il, 73 


͵ 
wee 
‘ 
ad 
,᾿ 
4Φ of 
Poe ere.) 


“ὦ ng ee eee ee Se ΤῊΣ ΟΡ». τ τὰ ΤῊ ae a 5 ΓΥΒΝ ee 
, ; a — oo 


4. 
eo 


ὩΣ # 
3 : ῳ 
3 > 

= We Sec | 

ae SS: 

ae. ; Ων Ww 
ἜΝ ᾿ ᾿ ; a μ- ᾿ ἋΣ 
ge ek A Ww WW | aes: ; 
Be 4 ; Ἦν ὶ Ἢ ΣῊΝ 
= Rte a 4 
| | 3 ΣΕ ἘΠ a Se πῆρ | # 

5 ι ᾿ ee 5.4. ὌΠ ΛΟ ee ἢ ἕ ; ak | 
ise 


i 
er a Ap 


AIBANIOT ΥΠΟΘΕΣΙΣ 


ΤΕΙ͂ΧΟΣ μὲν ὁ ῥήτωρ ὑπὲρ ᾿Αθηναίων προὐβάλετο τῶν συνή- 
/ 
θων τούτων Kai χειροποιήτων ἀρραγέστερόν τε Kal βέλτιον, THY TE 
> \ / 7 
εἰς τὴν πόλιν εὔνοιαν καὶ περὶ λόγους δεινότητα, ὡς αὐτὸς εἴρηκεν 
/ 
“ov λίθοις Kal πλίνθοις τὰς ᾿Αθήνας ὠχύρωσα, ἀλλὰ μεγάλαις 
δυνάμεσι καὶ πολλῇ τινι συμμαχίᾳ, τῇ μὲν ἐκ γῆς, τῇ δὲ ἐκ 
lA 2) > \ > \ \ > \ Ἁ iz; > 
θαλάττης" ov μὴν ἀλλὰ Kal εἰς τὸν χειροποίητον περίβολον οὐ 
x a / / / \ \ \ , 
μικρὰ TH πόλει συνεβάλετο. πεπονήηκότος γὰρ κατὰ πολλὰ μερὴη 
a / ar a / > \ » > fa : νὰ Cu. ἋΣ 
τοῦ τείχους τοῖς ᾿Αθηναίοις, ἐπειδὴ ἔδοξεν ἀνορθοῦν αὐτὸ, ἡρέθησαν 
9 \ ef BA / an ¢ rs e ἃ ΝΜ \ > / 
ἐπὶ TO ἔργον ἄνδρες δέκα, φυλῆς ἑκάστης εἷς, ods ἔδει τὴν ἐπιμέ- 
λείαν παρέχεσθαι ψιλήν: τὸ γὰρ ἀνάλωμα δημόσιον. εἷς τοίνυν 
7 e / a U \ 
τούτων καὶ ὁ ῥήτωρ γενόμενος οὐχ ὁμοίως τοῖς ἄλλοις τὴν ἐπιμέ- 
/ a \ / 
λείαν μόνην εἰσήνεγκε TH χρείᾳ, ἀλλὰ TO μὲν ἔργον ἀμέμπτως 
a / , 
ἀπετέλεσε, τὰ δὲ χρήματα ἔδωκεν οἴκοθεν TH πόλει. * ἐπήνεσεν 
> a \ EA / ς \ \ \ / ? / 
αὐτοῦ τὴν εὔνοιαν ταύτην ἡ βουλὴ, Kai τὴν προθυμίαν HuEerpaTo 
lal a \ \ la 9 
στεφάνῳ χρυσῷ" ἕτοιμοι yap ᾿Αθηναῖοι πρὸς Tas χάριτας τῶν εὖ 
a \ lal an 
ποιούντων. Κτησιφῶν dé ἦν ὁ τὴν γνώμην εἰπὼν ὡς δεῖ στεφανῶσαι 
: \ A a rd \ / a an 
τὸν Δημοσθένην, ἐν μὲν καιρῷ τοῖς Διονυσίοις, ἐν δὲ τόπῳ τῷ TOD 
a an δ ΧΟ ἃ 
Διονύσου θεάτρῳ, ἐν δὲ θεαταῖς πᾶσι τοῖς “ἔλλησιν, ods ἡ πανή- 
“ \ 
‘yupis συνήγαγε: Kal τούτων ἐναντίον ἀνειπεῖν τὸν κήρυκα OTL 
a / / fal 
στεφανοῖ Δημοσθένην Δημοσθένους Ilavaviea ἡ πόλις ἀρετῆς 
an \ : φ τ , 
συμπάσης ἕνεκα καὶ εὐνοίας τῆς πρὸς αὐτήν. ἦν οὖν πανταχόθεν 
/ an / \ “ / 
ἡ τιμὴ θαυμαστή. διὸ καὶ φθόνος αὐτῆς ἥψατο, καὶ τοῦ ψηφί- 
ἌἊ Ν 2 \ av 
σματος ἀπηνέχθη παρανόμων γραφή. Αἰσχίνης yap ἐχθρὸς ὧν 
“ lal ny / 
τοῦ Δημοσθένους ἀγῶνα παρανόμων ἐπήγγειλε Κτησιφῶντι, λέγων 
LA / 
_apyovta γεγονότα τὸν Δημοσθένην καὶ μὴ δόντα λόγον ὑπεύθυνον 
\ a \ , 
εἶναι, νόμον δὲ κελεύειν τοὺς ὑπευθύνους μὴ στεφανοῦν, καὶ πάλιν 


Da 


4 ΔΗΛΛΟΣΘΕΝΟῪΣ 


4 / \ a +X / ς an » | / 
νόμον παρεχόμενος TOV κελεύοντα, ἐὰν μέν τινα ὁ δῆμος ὁ Αθηναίων 
στεφανοῖ, ἐν τῇ ἐκκλησίᾳ τὸν στέφανον ἀναγορεύεσθαι, ἐὰν δὲ ἡ 
βουλὴ, ἐν τῷ βουλευτηρίῳ, ἀλλαχόθι δὲ μὴ ἐξεῖναι. φησὶ δὲ καὶ 
τοὺς ἐπαίνους εἶναι τοὺς ἐπὶ τῷ Δημοσθένει ψευδεῖς" μὴ γὰρ 
πεπολιτεῦσθαι καλῶς τὸν ῥήτορα, ἀλλὰ καὶ δωροδόκον εἶναι καὶ 
πολλῶν κακῶν αἴτιον τῇ πόλει. καὶ τάξει γε ταύτῃ τῆς κατη- 
γορίας Αἰσχίνης κέχρηται, πρῶτον εἰπὼν περὶ τοῦ τῶν ὑπευθύνων 
νόμου καὶ δεύτερον περὶ τοῦ τῶν κηρυγμάτων καὶ τρίτον περὶ τῆς 
πολιτείας" ἠξίωσε δὲ καὶ τὸν Δημοσθένην τὴν αὐτὴν τάξιν ποιή- 
σασθαι. ὁ δὲ ῥήτωρ καὶ ἀπὸ τῆς πολιτείας τὴν ἀρχὴν ἐποιήσατο 
καὶ πάλιν εἰς ταύτην τὸν λόγον κατέστρεψε, τεχνικῶς ποιῶν" δεῖ 


ἴω / lal 
do ἄρνεσθαί τε ἀπὸ τῶν iayUpOoTéepwY Kal λήγειν εἰς ταῦτα" 
yap ἀρχ 


nN 7 \ “Ὁ \ \ lal ς 
μέσα δὲ τέθεικε τὰ περὶ τῶν νόμων, καὶ τῷ μὲν περὶ τῶν ὑπευ- 
/ “ \ \ a / , 
θύνων ἀντιτίθησι διανοίας, τῷ δὲ περὶ τῶν κηρυγμάτων νόμον 
ἢ ΄ / 5 ΟΝ 2 τὰ A 
ἕτερον ἤτοι νόμου μέρος, ὥς φησιν αὐτὸς, ἐν ᾧ συγκεχώρηται 
\ 5 A 7] / ὟΝ ic an x ς \ n 
καὶ ἐν τῷ θεάτρῳ κηρύττειν ἐὰν ὁ δῆμος ἢ ἡ βουλὴ τοῦτο 
ψηφίσηται. 


ETEPA ὙΥΠΟΘΕΣΙΣ 


᾿Αθηναῖοι καὶ Θηβαῖοι πολεμοῦντες πρὸς Φίλιππον ἐν Χαι- 
ρωνείᾳ, πόλει τῆς Βοιωτίας, ἡττήθησαν. ἐπικρατήσας οὖν ὁ 
Μακεδὼν φρουρὰν μὲν εἰς τὰς Θήβας ἐνέβαλε, καὶ εἶχεν ὑπὸ χεῖρα 
δουλεύουσαν. ἐλπίσαντες οὖν τὸ αὐτὸ παθεῖν ᾿Αθηναῖοι καὶ ὅσον 
οὐδέπω κατ᾽ αὐτῶν ἥξειν προσδοκῶντες τὸν τύραννον, ἐσκέψαντο 
τὰ πεπονηκότα μέρη τῷ χρόνῳ τοῦ τείχους ἐπανορθώσασθαι, καὶ 
δὴ ἀφ᾽ ἑκάστης φυλῆς τειχοποιοὶ προεβλήθησαν. τοιόνδε καὶ ἡ 
Πανδιονὶς ἐξ ἑαυτῆς εἵλετο πρὸς τὴν χρείαν τὸν ῥήτορα. τῆς τοίνυν 
ἐργασίας ἐν χερσὶν οὔσης, προσδεηθεὶς ἔτι χρημάτων μετὰ τὰ δεδο- 
μένα ὑπὸ τῆς πόλεως, ὁ ῥήτωρ ἐκ τῶν ἰδίων ἐδαπάνησε, καὶ οὐκ 
5 / > \ “ / > io / 1 7 > \ ἕξ 
ἐλογίσατο αὐτὰ τῇ πόλει, ἀλλὰ κατεχαρίσατο". ταύτην ἀφορμὴν oO 
lal - lal / Ὁ 
Κτησιφῶν, εἷς τῶν πολιτευομένων, δεξάμενος εἰσήνεγκε γνώμην ἐν τῇ 
la \ > a / cu \ lal / : 
βουλῇ περὶ αὐτοῦ τοιαύτην, “ ἐπειδὴ διατελεῖ Δημοσθένης ὁ Δημο- 
θέ ae: x / BA 2 \ / μὰ ὃ A \ 
σθένους Tap ὅλον τὸν βίον εὔνοιαν ELS τὴν πόλιν ἐπιδεικνύμενος, καὶ 
νῦν δὲ τειχοποιὸς ὧν καὶ προσδεηθεὶς χρημάτων οἴκοθεν παρέσχε 
ἼΣΑ / \ A / a a \ A Qs n 
καὶ ἐχαρίσατο, διὰ τοῦτο δεδόχθαι τῇ βουλῇ Kal τῷ δήμῳ στεφανοῦ- 
\ 7 a lal 
σθαι αὐτὸν χρυσέῳ στεφάνῳ ἐν TO θεάτρῳ, τραγῳδιῶν ἀγομένων 


1 Mss. καὶ ἐχαρίσατο. ‘* Malim κατεχαρίσατο.᾽" ἃ. H. Schaefer. 


22 


22 


ΠΕΡῚ TOY ΣΤΕΦΑΝΟῪ ς 


“ 9. oy [τς 7 4 2 a) Ν / 
καινῶν, ἴσως ὅτε πλήθη συντρέχει ἐπιθυμοῦντα Kawa δράματα 
/ n an 
βλέπειν. εἰσαγομένου τοίνυν καὶ εἰς τὸν δῆμον τοῦ προβουλεύ- 
ἴω n / a 
ματος, ἐφίσταται τοῦ Κτησιφῶντος κατήγορος ΔΛἰσχίνης, ἐκ τῆς 
/ 5 \ va) 
πολιτείας ὑπάρχων ἐχθρὸς, παράνομον εἶναι φάσκων πρὸς τρεῖς 
4 \ 7 Ψ \ \ / \ Ε S \ 
νόμους TO ψήφισμα, ἕνα μὲν Tov κελεύοντα TOV ὑπεύθυνον μὴ 
n x x fal \ > / yA \ es \ e 
στεφανοῦσθαι πρὶν av δῷ Tas εὐθύνας" οὔπω δὲ ταύτας, φησὶν, ὁ 
7 an fa 
Δημοσθένης ἐδεδώκει καὶ τὰ θεωρικὰ διοικῶν καὶ τειχοποιῶν, καὶ 
ES 5 Ἂ xe a \ f Ψ a 2 a \ > 
ἔδει ἀναμεῖναι καὶ ἐπισχεῖν τὸ γέρας ἕως ἂν ὀφθῇ καθαρὸς ἐξε- 
/ 
τασθείς. δεύτερον δὲ ἀναγινώσκει νόμον τὸν κελεύοντα ἐν 1Πυκνὶ 
στεφανοῦσθαι ἐν τῇ ἐκκλησίᾳ, διαβάλλων τοὺς πολίτας τοὺς 


24 δεξαμένους ἐν τῷ θεάτρῳ ἀναγορευθῆναι τοῦ Δημοσθένους τὸν 


στέφανον « δὲ 7 / 3 \ OX ς an rn Bi Ν n 
. ὁ δὲ τρίτος νόμος εἰς τὴν ὅλην Opa τοῦ βίου Kal τῆς 
7] > / m4 \ / an / ως \ 
πολιτείας ἐξέτασιν" κελεύει γὰρ μηδέποτε ψευδῆ γράμματα εἰς τὸ 
A > , ¢ x / 7 
Μητρῷον εἰσάγειν, ἔνθα ἐστὶν ὅλα τὰ δημόσια γράμματα. ἐψεύ- 
x \ BA \ \ 7] Ὁ / 
caro δὲ, φησὶν, εὔνοιαν. καὶ σπουδὴν μαρτυρήσας τῷ Δημοσθένει 
Qn \ / e 7 an 7 / 
κακόνους Yap μᾶλλον καὶ πολέμιος εὑρίσκεται Τῇ πατρίδι. τούτου 
a , nan / id 
τοῦ νόμου χρησίμου τυγχάνοντος, τοῦ τρίτου, ἀντιλαβόμενος ὥσπερ 
Ν 7 «ς 7 / 
τινὸς ἀγκύρας ὁ ῥήτωρ κατεπάλαισε TOV ἀντίδικον, μεθόδῳ δεινο- 
A \ an an nan 
τάτῃ Kal σοφωτάτῃ TH περὶ τοῦ κατηγόρου χρησάμενος" ἐκεῖθεν 
\ ἂν 1 ¢ nN \ 7 \ 7 \ 
yap ἔσχε λαβὴν ENELY καὶ καταγωνίσασθαι τὸν πολέμιον. TOUS 
\ \ 7. ͵ “ὦ. \ a 
μὲν yap ἄλλους δύο νόμους, τόν τε τῶν ὑπευθύνων καὶ τὸν τοῦ 
ν > \ 7 “ / al 
κηρύγματος, εἰς TO μέσον τοῦ λόγου ἀπέρριψε, στρατηγικῶς 
7 A ἧς 7 
“κακοὺς ἐς μέσσον ἐλάσσας", τῷ δὲ ἰσχυροτάτῳ εἰς τὰ ἄκρα 
/ \ \ lal ” b) ς 7 « J yy \ 
TPOTKEXPNTAL, TO σαθρὸν τῶν ἄλλων ἐξ ἑκατέρου ῥωννύς. ἔοικε δὲ 
x a \ x ἕ \ / \ 3 48 » δῶ 
καὶ διοικεῖν πρὸς τὸ συμφέρον τὸν λόγον, καὶ οὐ σφόδρα ἀναιδῶς 
\ an 7 \ 
τὴν τέχνην ἐπιδεικνύμενος. δοκῶν yap ἐν πρώτοις ὑπερβαίνειν TO 
7 7 ΄ a) 7 x / 
νόμιμον, ἑτέρῳ TPOTT@ τῷ νομίμῳ προσκέχρηται" καὶ γὰρ νόμον 
eS ae ρον Ν \ an ie, mY na Ν ἃ eH 
ἀνέγνω Αἰσχίνης τὸν περὶ τῶν στεφάνων" ψευδῆ, πρὸς ὃν ὁ ῥήτωρ 
/ - \ 7 n an 7 
ἀποκρινόμενος εὗρε καιρὸν εἰς μέσον ἀγαγεῖν τὰ ἑαυτοῦ πολιτεύ- 
/ / ἴω 7, 
ματα, ὡς νομίμῳ μαχόμενος. καὶ ἡ μὲν διοίκησις τοῦ λογου 
/ a δὲ ’ \ A \ Ae 7 \ 7 A δὲ 
τοιαύτη, κεφάλαιον δὲ ἰσχυρὸν τῷ μὲν Αἰσχίνῃ τὸ νόμιμον, τῷ OE 


¢ 


/ \ / \ \ 2 \ na \ / 2 ” 
ῥήτορι TO δίκαιον, κοινὸν δὲ ἀπὸ τοῦ ἴσου TO συμφέρον, οὐκ ἔχον 


225 φανερὰν τὴν ἐξέτασιν. ἡ στάσις ἔγγραφος πραγματική" περὶ 


ῥητοῦ γὰρ τὸ ψήφισμα. 
Τῆς δὲ γραφῆς ἔτι Φιλί 

ξάνδρου διαδεξαμένου τὴν ἀρχὴν ὁ λόγος ἐστὶ καὶ ἡ κρίσις. ὡς γὰρ 

ἀπέθανε Φίλιππος καὶ τὴν φρουρὰν οἱ Θηβαῖοι τεθαρσηκότες 


an 7 Ν om 
ππου ζῶντος ἀποτεθείσης, ἐπὶ ᾿Αλε- 


1 Tl. τν. 299. See 6. H. Schaefer’s note. 
2 mss. στεφάνων. Weil ἐπιφερόντων. Blass γραφόντων. 


4 


cm 


6 


6 AHMOSOENOYS ΠΕΡῚ TOY STEPANOY 


ἐξέβαλον, ὁ μὲν ᾿Αλέξανδρος ὡς καταφρονηθεὶς τὰς Θήβας κατέ- 

σκαψεν, εἶτα μεταγνοὺς ἐπὶ τῷ πεπραγμένῳ ἐξεχώρησε τῆς ᾿Ελλά- 

δος αἰσχυνόμενος καὶ κατὰ τῶν βαρβάρων ἐστράτευσεν, οἱ δὲ 

᾿Αθηναῖοι καιρὸν ἔχειν ἐνόμισαν κρίσει παραδοῦναι τοὺς προδότας 
\ \ ς / > / x WA / \ 

τοὺς τὴν “Πλλάδα ἀδικήσαντας, Kal οὕτω συνεκροτήθη τὸ δικα- 

στήριον. 


ΔΗΛΛΟΣΘΕΝΟΥΣ 


Geer. LOY 


=TE®ANOY 


\ ΟΝ. ὁ > A al val 
ΠΡΩΤΟΝ μὲν, ὦ ἄνδρες ᾿Αθηναῖοι, τοῖς θεοῖς εὔχομαι 
; ἴω QA ’ ν » lal A 
πᾶσι καὶ πάσαις, ὅσην εὔνοιαν ἔχων ἐγὼ διατελῶ τῇ TE 


CRITICAL NOTES. 


Title: Δημοσθένους ὑπὲρ τοῦ Στεφάνου Σ: 


but at the end of 


the oration ὑπὲρ τοῦ Κτησιφώντος περὶ τοῦ Στεφάνου. 


Text. Line 2. 


81. 


PROOEMIUM: 88 1—8. The solemn 
earnestness with which Demosthenes 
undertook this vindication of his whole 
political life is shown by the unusual and 
impressive prayer with which he begins, 
and still more by its repetition. He shows 
the same spirit in the appeal to the Gods 
in § 141, with which he introduces his 
account of the fatal events which led to 
Chaeronea, and in his peroration (§ 324). 
His earnest appeal to the judges to grant 
him an impartial hearing, which struck 
Cicero by its humility (semmdssius a 
primo, Orat. 26) and Quintilian by its 
timidity (¢2mzdo summissogue princifio, 
xi. 3), was no mere rhetorical device 
or captatio benevolentiae, but chiefly an 
honest recognition of his position as an 
advocate, who was no party to the suit, 
and so in many respects at the mercy of 
the court. This prooemium was fre- 
quently quoted with laudation by the 
ancient rhetoricians. Dionysius dwells 
on the rhythm of the periods; and he thus 
divides the first clause, πρῶτον pév...7d- 


διατελῶ om. V6. 


τε above line L. 


gas, into feet: ἄρχει βακχεῖος ῥυθμὸς, 
ἔπειθ᾽ ἕπεται σπονδεῖος, εἶτα dvdmraioTos, 
καὶ μετὰ τοῦτο ἕτερος σπονδεῖος, εἶθ᾽ ἑξῆς 
κρητικοὶ τρεῖς, σπονδεῖος δὲ ὁ τελευταῖος. 
*This is --~|--|~~-|+-- | 
-~-|-~-|-~-|--; and he com- 
pares the last four feet with the verse 
Κρησίοις ἐν ῥυθμοῖς παῖδα μέλψωμεν. 

§ 1. 1. τοῖς θεοῖς πᾶσι καὶ πάσαις, fo 
all the Gods and Goddesses. 8edsis Goddess 


“as well as God, θεά being poetic; thus 


ἡ θεός is the common title of Athena. 
A slight extension of the solemn formula 
πᾶσι καὶ πάσαις becomes absurdly comic 
in Ar. Av. 866 εὔχεσθε ὄρνισιν ᾿Ολυμπίοις 
kal ᾿λυμπίῃσι πᾶσι καὶ πάσῃσιν. Cf. 
Thesm. 331—334. The scholiast on Ar. 
Eq. 765 thinks that Demosthenes was 
helped here by the mock invocation of 
Cleon in Eq. 763—768! 

2. ἔχων διατελῶ: ἀντὶ τοῦ del ἔχω, 
᾿Αττικῶς. Schol. (See M.T. 879.) The 
words ἔχων διατελεῖ with εὔνοια probably 
occurred in Ctesiphon’s decree: in the 
spurious document in ὃ 118 we have ἧς 


8 AHMOZO0ENOY2 


R 

/ \ la crs , ε ’, a ~ > Ρ 

πόλει καὶ πᾶσιν ὑμῖν, τοσαύτην ὑπάρξαι μοι παρ᾽ ὑμῶν εἰς 2 
ao SE RIS od ΝΣ as te go. sas Δισ ΝΣ ie \ 
τουτονὶ TOV ἀγῶνα, ἔπειθ᾽ ὅπερ ἐστὶ μάλισθ᾽ ὑπὲρ ὑμῶν καὶ 

‘al \ , a) eR 
5 τῆς ὑμετέρας εὐσεβείας τε Kal δόξης, τοῦτο παραστῆσαι 
ἴω A / 

τοὺς θεοὺς ὑμῖν, μὴ τὸν ἀντίδικον σύμβουλον ποιήσασθαι 
An na σι lat al ΄, \ x vy 
περὶ τοῦ πῶς ἀκούειν ὑμᾶς ἐμοῦ δεῖ (σχέτλιον yap ἄν εἴη 


5 


- available to nie). 


235, 248; cf. 267). 


plies > \ \ ΄ LAN ee 3 
TOUTO γε), ἀλλὰ τους νομοῦυς Και TOV ΟρΡΚΟον, εν 


cb 
ω 


t 


ῳ 
πρὸς ατΤασὶι 


la ΄ ~ Le ee ΄ὕ 5 ον 
τοῖς ἄλλοις δικαίοις καὶ τοῦτο γέγραπται, τὸ ὁμοίως ἀμφοῖν 


3 , 
ἀκροάσασθαι. 


lal > rg Ν 4 
TOUTO δ᾽ ἐστὶν ου μόνον ΤΟ μη προκατεγνω- 


» 9 aA 5 \ \ 
κέναι “μηδὲν οὐδὲ τὸ τὴν εὔνοιαν ἴσην ἀποδοῦναι, ἀλλὰ τὸ 
καὶ τῇ τάξει καὶ Τῇ ἀπολογίᾳ, ὡς βεβούληται καὶ προήρηται 
τῶν ἀγωνιζομένων ἕ ἕκαστος, οὕτως ἐᾶσαι χρήσασθαι. 


§ 2. 3. adxpodcacba x, B; 


4. ἴσην ἀμφοτέροις on (yp); Az, vulg.: ν ἀμφοτ. om. Σ, Li Ae 


Σ, L, A2; ἀλλὰ καὶ τὸ vulg. 5. 
6. χρῆσθαι Al, above χρήσασθαι 1, (yp). 


ἔχων διατελεῖ. Aeschines (III. 49) quotes 
from the decree ὅτι διατελεῖ καὶ λέγων καὶ 
πράττων: see the spurious indictment 
(below) ὃ 54%, and §57!2. For εὔνοια see 
§§ 110, 321, 322. 

83. ὑπάρξαι μοι, be granted me (be made 
The fundamental idea 
of ὑπάρχω in this sense is best seen in τὰ 


ὑπάρχοντα, the resources or the existing 


conditions, i.e. what is available, what oné 
has to depend on: see note on ὑπάρχειν 
ὃ 95%, and βέλτιστον ὑπάρχει, IX. 5. 

4. ἀγῶνα: see note on ἀγωνίζομαι, 
§ 3". -ἔπειθ᾽, secondly: simple. ἔπειτα 
(without δέ) is the regular rhetorical for- 
mula after πρῶτον μέν (see §§ 8, 18, 177, 
Thucydides generally 
has this, but ἜΑ ἔπειτα δέ.---ὅπερ ἐστὶ: 
εὔχομαι, δηλονότι (Schol.), referring to the 
whole sentence Sep. sdxpodouaban. The 
relation of ὅπερ to τοῦτο here is clearly 
that of 8 τι (δ 8°) to the following τοῦτο; 
otherwise we might be inclined to take 
ὅπερ here as=zd guod, explained by 
τοῦτο... ἀκροάσασθαι.---ἐστὶ μάλισθ᾽ ὑπὲρ 
ὑμῶν, concerns you especially (more than 
myself). 

5. εὐσεβείας: referring to the oath 
(§ 2). Greek εὐσέβεια reached a lower 
level than our frety, including negative 


ἀκροᾶσθαι L, vulg.; ἀκροάσεσθαι Spengel, 


Bl. 
ἀλλὰ τὸ καὶ 


καὶ τὸ τῇ ἀπολογίᾳ Υ; καὶ τῇ αὐτῇ ἀπολ. A2. 


———————— 


abstinence from impiety, so that one who 


does not break his oath is so far εὐσεβής. 


--τοῦτο παραστῆσαι ὑμῖν, may put this 
into your hearts: τοῦτο refers back em- 
phatically to the omitted antecedent of 
ὅπερ, as οὕτως (§ 2%) to that of ws, and is 
explained by μὴ τὸν ἀντίδικον K.T.d. 

7. πῶς... δεῖ: explained by τὸ καὶ... 
χρήσασθαι (end of 8 2): cf. περὶ... ἐργά- 


σεται, Hdt. Vill. 79, and περὶ τοῦ ὅντινα 


τρόπον χρὴ ζῆν, Plat. Rep. 352 Ὁ. 

Ὁ) 
which each judge had sworn. The docu- 
ment in XXIV. 149—151 purporting to be 


this famous oath (hardly authentic) has 


this clause: καὶ dxpodcoua τοῦ κατηγόρου 
kal τοῦ ἀπολογουμένου ὁμοίως ἀμφοῖν. For 
the connection of the laws with the oath, 
see note on § 6°, 

2. δικαίοις, sust provisions, perhaps 
Provisions of law. West. cites for the 
latter meaning XX. 94, τοσούτων ὄντων 
δικαίων ; but two lines above δίκαια has 
clearly its ordinary force of just, applied 
to provisions of law. 

3. ἀκροάσασθαι: this or ἀκροᾶσθαι 
is far preferable to the emendation 
ἀκροάσεσθαι. The infin. with τό here 
denotes simply the provision for hearing 
both sides tmpartially. This infin. is 


τὸν ὅρκον : the Heliastic oath, | 


TEP] TOY 2TEPANOY 9 


\ Ss ν ὃν 5 A \ CS Sea 
Πολλὰ μὲν οὖν ἔγωγ᾽ ἐλαττοῦμαι κατὰ τουτονὶ TOV ἀγῶνα 8 
Αἰσχίνου, δύο δ᾽, ὦ ἄνδρες ᾿Αθηναῖοι, καὶ μεγάλα, ἕν μὲν 
la) » wn 
OTL οὐ περὶ τῶν ἴσων ἀγωνίζομαι" οὐ yap ἐστιν ἰσον νῦν 
ἐμοὶ τῆς παρ᾽ ὑμῶν εὐνοίας διαμαρτεῖν καὶ τούτῳ μὴ ἑλεῖν 
\ \ > λ᾽ 3 Ν Ν 3 ON ὃ Ν 3 aA 
τὴν γραφὴν, ἀλλ᾽ ἐμοὶ μὲν---οὐ βούλομαι δυσχερὲς εἰπεῖν 5 
οὐδὲν ἀρχόμενος τοῦ λόγου, οὗτος δ᾽ ἐκ περιουσίας μου 


8 8. 2. wom. L. 4. 
λαβεῖν (over ἑλεῖν) B. 5. 


εὐνοίας διαπεσεῖν VO. 
ἐγὼ (for ἐμοὶ) B (yp), 
L, vulg.; δὲ om. 2}, above line =”, B (yp). 


μὴλεῖν (w. € over n) 2; 
Y (yp). οὐ βούλομαι δὲ 
δυσχερὲς οὐδὲν εἰπεῖν L, At, VO. 


commonly a verbal noun wezthout ¢tempo- 
ral force, and is generally present or 
aorist (M.T. 96). The perfect is some- 
times needed to express completion (as 
προκατεγνωκέναι, below) and the future 
may emphasize futurity, as without the 
article. The infin. with τό is occasion- 
ally found in or. od/., with its tense fully 
preserved, or with ἄν. (See Birklein, 
Substant. Infin., p. 94; and M.T.°.109, 
113, 212, 794.)—TO μὴ προκατεγνωκέναιυ: 
not having decided against (κατά) either 
party in advance: Td μὴ προκαταγνῶναι 
would be timeless, like τὸ ἀκροάσασθαι 
(above) and τὸ ἀποδοῦναι and τὸ ἐᾶσαι 
(below). 

4. οὐδὲ (sc. μόνον), nor only (cf. 
ὃ 93") 

5. καὶ τῇ τάξει... χρήσασθαι, ie. 20 
adopt not only (καὶ) that order of argument 
but also (καὶ) that general plan of defence 
which εἰς.---ὡς.. ἕκαστος : for the rhe- 
torical amplification see note on § 4°. 
ἕκαστος is made subject of the relative 
clause, as this precedes; we reverse the 
* order, and translate it with χρήσασθαι.--- 
ἀπολογίᾳ refers strictly to the defence, 
which alone remained. 

6. τῶν ἀγωνιζομένων ἕκαστος (not 
ἑκάτερος), acc. to Weil, is “tout homme 
-qui plaide sa cause,” a general expres- 
sion. He remarks that dywvifoua ap- 
plies especially to the defendant, citing 
XIX. 214 (end), XXI. 7, 90, XXIII. 100, 
XXIV. 28, 131, [XXVI.] 20. 

This is a dignified appeal against the 
offensive demand of Aeschines (111. 202), 
that the court should either refuse to hear 
Demosthenes or (at least) compel him to 


follow his adversary’s order of argument. 
Spengel (see Dindorf’s note) calls this ar- 
gument ‘‘sophistical,” since granting free- 
dom of arrangement is not fairly included 
in τὸ ὁμοίως ἀμφοῖν ἀκροάσασθαι. But 
both parties could not be heard imparti- 
ally if one were compelled dy the court 
itself to present his case in the most 
damaging order at his opponent’s dic- 
tation. 

§ 3. 1. πολλὰ: sc. ἐλαττώματα. 

3. ἀγωνίζομαι, like ἀγών, used of 
contests of all kinds, here of a lawsuit. 
See the pun on the two meanings of 
ἀγωνίσασθαι περὶ θανάτου in IV. 47. 

4. διαμαρτεῖν, fo forfeit: cf. ἀποστε- 
ρεῖσθαι, ὃ 54, and the following words.— 
μὴ ἑλεῖν τὴν γραφήν, γ107 to gain his case: 
οἵ. ᾿Ολύμπια νικᾶν, Thue. I. 126; ψήφισμα 
νικᾷ, Aesch. III. 68; πολλὰς... γραφὰς 
διώξας οὐδεμίαν εἷλεν, Ant. 2, A%, 5. ἑλεῖν 
γραφήν (or δίκην) may also have a direct 
accusative, as δίκας εἷλεν Εἰὔπολιν δύο, 
Isae. VII. 10: these expressions are used 
only of the plaintiff; a victorious defend- 
ant is said γραφὴν (δίκην) ἀποφυγεῖν, a 
defeated defendant γραφὴν (δίκην) ὀφλεῖν. 

5. GAN ἐμοὶ μὲν: a familiar ἀποσιώ- 
πησις, often quoted by the rhetoricians. 
What is plainly meant would sound un- 
pleasant (δυσχερές) and suggest disastér 
in the opening of his speech. Aquila 
Rom. (de fig. 5) translates: sed mihi qui- 
dem—nolo quicquam initio dicendi omi- 
nosius proloqui. See Quint. IX. 2, 54, 
who quotes ‘‘quos ego—sed motos prae- 
stat componere fluctus,” Aen. I. 135. 
Cf. εἴτ᾽ d—, § 225; τότε δ᾽---, § 1957, 

6. ἐκ περιουσίας, at an advantage, lit. 


IO AHMOZOENOY2 


κατηγορεῖ. 


“ ε ὦ, 
ἕτερον δ᾽, ὃ φύσει πᾶσιν ἀνθρώποις ὑπάρχει, 


na “ lal “ ε 4 le 
TOV μὲν λοιδοριῶν Kal τῶν κατηγοριῶν ἀκούειν ἡδέως, τοῖς 


A \ » , 4 ἃ , > 
4 ἐπαινοῦσι δ᾽ αὑτοὺς a bec bar: τούτων TOLVVUVY O εν €OTL 
Χ 


aA nw ε » 9 lal 
πρὸς ἡδονὴν τούτῳ δέδοται, ὃ δὲ πᾶσιν ὡς ἔπος εἰπεῖν 


la ‘a A rd 
ἐνοχλεῖ λοιπὸν ἐμοί. κἂν μὲν, εὐλαβούμενος τοῦτο μὴ λέγω 


a ς Ἂ 
| τὰ πεπραγμένα ἐμαυτῷ, οὐκ ἔχειν ἀπολύσασθαι τὰ κατης- 


ς γορημένα δόξω οὐδ᾽ ἐφ᾽ οἷς ἀξιῶ τιμᾶσθαι δεικνύναι: ἐὰν. 
δ᾽ ἐφ᾽ ἃ καὶ πεποίηκα καὶ πεπολίτευμαι βαδίζω, πολλάκις 


λέγειν ἀναγκασθήσομαι περὶ ἐμαυτοῦ. 


8. τῶν (before κατ.) om. O. 


ἀκούειν above line Σ, 1,2, om. L!. 9. 


> 
πειράσομαι μὲν οὖν 


δεάυτους 


Zz; δ᾽ αὑτοὺς L, vulg.; τοῖς δ᾽ ἐπαιν. ἑαυτοὺς O (corr. from δ᾽ αὐτοὺς). 


§ 4. 4. κατηγορούμενα Ο.: 


5. ἐὰν 2, L, Az, ό; Greve 


6. δ᾽ om. ®. 


Jrom an abundance, like a rich man who 
stakes little compared with his wealth. 
In Luke xxi. 4, the rich cast into the 
treasury ‘‘of their abundance” or ‘‘super- 
fluity,” ἐκ τοῦ περισσεύοντος αὐτοῖς. See 
Dem. XLV. 67, where οἱ ἐκ περιουσίας 
πονηροί is equivalent to οἱ μετ᾽ εὐπορίας 
πονηροί and opposed to οἱ per’ ἐνδείας 
(πονηροί) ; Plat. Theaet. 154 Ὁ, ἐκ περι- 
ουσίας ἀλλήλων ἀποπειρώμενοι, Crying one 
another (with arguments) zantonly or 
for mere pastime (see Campbell’s note) ; 
Thuc. V. 103, τοὺς ἀπὸ περιουσίας χρωμέ- 
νους αὐτῇ (ἐλπίδι), those who indulge hope 
when they have abundant resources, and 
VI. 55, πολλῷ τῷ περιόντι τοῦ ἀσφαλοῦς 
κατεκράτησε. Harpocration (under ἐκ 
περιουσίας) thus explains our passage: ἐγὼ 
μὲν περὶ τῶν ἐσχάτων κινδυνεύω, οὗτος δ᾽ ἐκ 
πολλοῦ τοῦ περιόντος μου κατηγορεῖ. 

7. ἕτερον δ᾽ (sc. ἐλάττωμα) corresponds 
to ἕν μὲν in 2, and keeps up the construc- 
tion of πολλὰ ἐλαττοῦμαι in 1. West. 
makes ἕτερον nom. (sc. ἐστίν) .---ὃ,, ὑπάρ- 
χει, which ἐς a natural disposition of the 
whole human race: πᾶσιν ἀνθρώποις sug- 
gests the subject of ἀκούειν and ἄχθεσθαι, 
which are in apposition to ἕτερον (M.T. 
745): 

8 4. 1. ἐστι πρὸς ἡδονὴν, makes for 
pleasure (ἐστὶν ἡδύ, Schol.): cf. Aeschyl. 
Pr. 494, av εἴη δαίμοσιν πρὸς ἡδονήν. 


2. ὡς ἔπος εἰπεῖν (M. T. 777) modifies 
πᾶσιν. Aeschines (III. 241) had warned 
the court against the self-glorification of 
Demosthenes. 

4. ἀπολύσασθαι: see ὃ 50° and note. 

6. Kal πεποίηκα καὶ πεπολίτευμαι: a 
familiar form of rhetorical amplification 
(opposed to modern ideas of style), for 
which ordinary speech would use πεπολί- 
τευμαι alone. Other instances are βεβού- 
ληται καὶ προήρηται (§ 2°), aes 
καὶ πεπολιτευμένων and κατεψεύδου καὶ 
διέβαλλες (§ 11”), ἐτραγῴδει καὶ διεξήει 
(8 13°), διέβαλλε καὶ διεξήει (§ τ4}}, ἐδί- 
δαξας καὶ διεξῆλθες (δ 22%), πολεμεῖν καὶ 
διαφέρεσθαι (§ 314). In these cases one 
verb is generic and the other specific; 
but sometimes two verbs of nearly or — 
quite the same meaning are used together 
for a similar rhetorical effect, as πράττειν 
καὶ ποιεῖν (§ 62), ζώντων καὶ ὄντων (§ 72). 
---ἰΒαδίζω, proceed, more formal than come 
or go. τινὲς ἐμέμψαντο ws τροπικὴν ἐν 
προοιμίοις οὐ καλῶς κειμένην rh débwr. 
Schol. The Scholia to Aesch. 111.’ 
censure ‘‘metaphor in the prooemium,” 
calling παράταξιν \ roatyteeeen ee 
σπουδὴ καὶ παραγγελία in Dem. XIX. 1 
“πολιτικώτερον᾽. Blass says of βαδίζω: 
‘doch ist Badifw nicht gleich tw, sondern 
bedeutet ‘geradeswegs (frisch, ohne Be- 
denken) eingehen auf,’”’ and he refers to 


TEP! TOY 2TEPANOY II 


ε ’ὔ A A ν x \ “A \ 

ὡς μετριώτατα τοῦτο ποιεῖν: ὅ TL δ᾽ ἂν TO πρᾶγμα αὐτὸ 

3 4 δ. ’ὔ @ » ε 

ἀναγκάζῃ, τούτου τὴν αἰτίαν οὗτός ἐστι δίκαιος ἔχειν ὁ 
Ὁ“ -" “Aw 

τοιοῦτον ἀγώνα ἐνστησάμενος. | 


Οἶμαι δ᾽ ὑμᾶς πάντας, ὦ ἄνδρες ᾿Αθηναῖοι, ἂν ὁμολο- 5 


μὰ \ ey Ν \ στον Ἄν}. \ \ val 
γῆσαι κοινὸν εἶναι τουτονὶ τὸν ἀγών ἐμοὶ καὶ Κτησιφώντι 

Ν 50." 3 »ἭἍ » ~ > ’, # Ν Ἂ 
καὶ οὐδὲν ἐλάττονος ἄξιον σπουδῆς ἐμοί: πάντων μὲν γὰρ 
3 ~ / 3 \ οἷ + “Δ | ae 
ἀποστερεῖσθαι λυπηρόν ἐστι καὶ χαλεπὸν, ἄλλως τε κἂν ὑπ 
ἐχθροῦ τῳτ ῦτο συμβαίνῃ, μάλιστα δὲ τῆς παρ᾽ ὑμῶν εὐνοίας 

Ae 

καὶ φιλανθρωπίας, ὅσῳπερ καὶ τὸ τυχεῖν τούτων μέγιστόν 
ἐστιν. περὶ τούτων δ᾽ ὄντος τουτουὶ τοῦ ἀγῶνος, ἀξιῶ καὶ 
δέομαι πάντων ὁμοίως ὑμῶν ἀκοῦσαί μου περὶ τῶν κατηγο- 
ρημένων ἀπολογουμένου δικαίως, ὥσπερ οἱ νόμοι κελεύουσιν, 


8. τοῦτο εἰπεῖν A2. 


ΒΒ. Ὑὶ ᾿Αθην. +, dy ὁμολ. Σ, L; πάντας ἂν ὁμολ. vulg. ᾿Αθηναῖοι =, L, O; 
δικασταὶ vulg.; ὦ ᾽Αθην. At; West. om. ὦ ἄνδ. ᾿Αθην. 2. éuol ΣΆ, Bl: éuol ΤῈ 
me, Le vulg. 3. μὲν om. V6. 4. ἀποστερεῖσθαι = (yp), L, vulg.; ἀπορεῖσθαι 2; 
ἀξόστερῆσθαι O. 5. τούτω Ol. συμβαίη Ar, V6. εὐνοίας Te Kal pir. 
Ay, VON; : 

§ 6. 1. περὶ πάντων V6. ὄντως ΟἹ. 2. κατηγορουμένων V6, O. 


βαδιοῦμαι in the same sense in 88 58, 
263. See other examples in the Index 
Demosth. of Preuss. 

8. ὡς μετριώτατα: cf. the full form ws 
av δύνωμαι μετριώτατα, § “569.---ὅ τι... 
ἀναγκάζῃ, whatever the case itself may 
require of me (lit. compel me): with ἀναγ- 
«afm without an infin. cf. Quint. ΧΙ. 1, 
22, qui Hoc se coegisset. 

9. δίκαιος ἔχειν: the common per- 
sonal construction (M. T. 762). The apo- 
dosis is future in sense, after the future 

᾿ ὅ τι ἂν ἀναγκάζῃ. 

10. 
kind, i.e. in which Ctesiphon is indicted 
and Demosthenes accused: cf. §§ 12—16. 

§ 5. τ. dv ὁμολογῆσαι: West. omits 
ὦ ἄνδρες ᾿Αθηναῖοι, probably to avoid ἄν 
after a comma, as Zand L giveit. But 
this position, though unusual, is not ob- 
jectionable when words belonging to the 
clause with ἄν (as here ὑμᾶς πάντας) pre- 
cede the inserted clause. (M. T. 222.) 
See Ar. Pac. 137, ἀλλ᾽, ὦ μέλ᾽, ἄν μοι 
σιτίων διπλῶν ἔδει, and Aeschyl. Ag. 251, 
τὸ μέλλον, ἐπεὶ γένοιτ᾽, ἂν κλύοις (or with- 


τοιοῦτον ἀγῶνα, a suit of this ἡ 


out commas). On the contrary, τί οὖν 
ἄν τις εἴποι, Dem. I. 19, and a few simi- 
lar expressions, in which probably little 
or no pause was felt, are irregular. In 
I. 14 we must read τις ἂν εἴποι with &. 

3. οὐδὲν ἐλάττονος, gute as great.— 
πάντων ἀποστερεῖσθαι, fo be deprived of 
anything: cf. πανταχοῦ, anywhere, ὃ 81°. 

6. ὅσῳπερ, (by so much) as: the im- 
plied τοσούτῳ is felt as limiting μάλιστα 
(sc. λυπηρὸν καὶ xaXerrév).—kal before τὸ 
τυχεῖν expresses the parallelism (so to 
speak) between Jostvg and gaining the 
privileges: see ἃ καὶ διεκωλύθη, § 604, 
and note. Such a καί can seldom be 
expressed in English, except by emphasis. 

8 6. 1. ἀξιῶ καὶ δέομαι : see note on 
oe 
3. δικαίως belongs to ἀκοῦσαι, from 
which it is separated partly for emphasis, 
and partly to bring it directly before 
ὥσπερ. It cannot be taken with ἀπολο- 
γουμένου, as the laws referred to have no 
reference to ἀπολογία, but require the 
judges to hear both sides impartially 


(δ 25). 


5 


12 ΔΗΛΛΟΣΘΕΝΟῪΥΣ 


ods ὁ τιθεὶς ἐξ ἀρχῆς Σόλων, εὔνους ὧν ὑμῖν καὶ δημοτικὸς, 
οὐ μόνον τῷ γράψαι κυρίους ᾧετο δεῖν εἶναι ἀλλὰ καὶ τῷ 
7 τοὺς δικάζοντας ὀμωμοκέναι, οὐκ ἀπιστῶν ὑμῖν, ὥς γ᾽ ἐμοὶ 
φαίνεται, ἀλλ᾽ ὁρῶν ὅτι τὰς αἰτίας καὶ τὰς διαβολὰς, αἷς ἐκ 
τοῦ πρότερος λέγειν ὁ διώκων ἰσχύει, οὐκ ἔνι τῷ φεύγοντι 
παρελθεῖν, εἰ μὴ τῶν δικαζόντων ἕκαστος ὑμῶν τὴν πρὸς 
5 τοὺς θεοὺς εὐσέβειαν φυλάττων καὶ τὰ τοῦ λέγοντος ὑστέρου 
δίκαι᾽ εὐνοϊκῶς προσδέξεται, καὶ παρασχὼν ἑαυτὸν ἴσον καὶ 
κοινὸν ἀμφοτέροις ἀκροατὴν οὕτω τὴν διάγνωσιν ποιήσεται. 


Aa, 
TEP ATAVTWYV. 


6. δικάζοντας Σ, 
§ 7. 1. ὑμῶν ΟἹ. 

At}, V6. δὲ 

ἈΠΟ Υ: ὕστερον ΣΡ 1 


Β, vulg. 
Al. 2, V6; πάντων vulg. 


4. ὁ τιθεὶς ἐξ ἀρχῆς, 1.6. the original 
maker: ὁ νόμον τιθείς is used like νομο- 
θέτης, for the dawgiver, whose title is 
perpetual. In ὁ νόμον θείς the participial 
force appears with its designation of time. 
In XXIII. 25 we have ὁ θεὶς τὸν νόμον, 
and in 27 ὁ τὸν νόμον τιθείς, both referring 
to the same lawgiver and the same law 
(from different points of view).—8nportv- 
kos, a friend of the people or of popular 
government: see Ar. Nub. 1187, ὁ Σόλων 
ὁ παλαιὸς ἣν φιλόδημος τὴν φύσιν. Aeschi- 
nes (111. 168—r7o) gives five marks of a 
δημοτικός, which Demosthenes ridicules in 
§ 122. Aesch. opposes the ὀλιγαρχικός 
to the δημοτικός. 

5. οὐ pdvov...dpapoKévat: i.e. Solon 
thought that these provisions for an im- 
partial hearing should have not merely 
the ordinary sanction which all laws have 
by enactment (τῷ γράψαι), but the further 
security which they gained by the judges 
swearing to uphold them. This double 
sanction was secured by enacting that 
these provisions should be a part of the 
Heliastic oath. We do not know whether 
they were also enacted in a distinct law, 
apart from the oath. γράφω, besides 
meaning ¢o propose a law or decree, often 
refers to the enactment as a whole, as 
here. 


L, A2, B, F; dcx. ὑμᾶς vulg. 


ws γ᾽ ἐμοὶ X, L, F, Φ, Y, O; as γέ μοι vulg. 
φυλάττων Σ, 1.1, Aa; 


ἣν bala 
διαφυλ. vulg. torépov 2, L*, Ar,. 
πεποίηται A2. 8. ἁπάντων >, L, 


8 7. 2. τὰς αἰτίας kal τὰς διαβολὰς; 
here used like λοιδορία τε καὶ αἰτία in XXII. 
21, 22. There airia is thus defined, as ~ 
opposed to ἔλεγχος: αἰτία μὲν yap ἐστιν 
ὅταν τις ψιλῷ χρησάμενος λόγῳ μὴ παρά- 
σχηται πίστιν ὧν λέγει, ἔλεγχος δὲ ὅταν 
ὧν ἂν εἴπῃ τις καὶ τἀληθὲς ὁμοῦ δείξῃ. 
Commonly, αἰτία refers to an accusation, 
whether true or false: cf. § 12° (εἴπερ 
ἦσαν ἀληθεῖς). 

3. τοῦ πρότερος λέγειν : in public suits 
(γραφαί) in the Heliastic courts, each 
side spoke once (though the time might 
be divided among several speakers), the 
plaintiff first; in private suits, and in the ~ 
Areopagus, ‘each side was allowed aq 
second argument. . 

4. παρελθεῖν, Zo escape 
ἐπὶ δρομέων. Schol. 

5. τοῦ λέγοντος ὑστέρου, the “second H 
(later) speaker, i.e. the defendant (τοῦ 
φεύγοντος) : see Ar. Vesp. 15, σὺ λέξον 
πρότερος, Hyper. Eux. ὃ 15, ὁ πρότερος 
ἐμοῦ λέγων. Cf. Dem. 1. 16, τοὺς ὑστά- 
τους... εἰπόντας. (West.) 

6. δίκαι᾽, pleadings, the statement of 
hs rights: cf. § οἵ (see ἊΝ εβι.).---προσδέξε- 

L, ou receive kindly, take under his — 
protection. 

7. οὕτω repeats with emphasis the 
idea of παρασχὼν... ἀκροατήν. 


(get by) ἡ 


7 ΠΕΡῚ TOY SZTEbANOY 13 


aA , , ¥ 
Μέλλων δὲ τοῦ τε ἰδίου βίου παντὸς, ὡς ἔοικε, λόγον 8 
διδόναι τήμερον καὶ τῶν κοινῇ πεπολιτευμένων, βούλομαι 
Ν a »»ἉἌ 
πάλιν τοὺς θεοὺς παρακαλέσαι, καὶ ἐναντίον ὑμῶν εὔχομαι 
A : κι κι \ 
πρῶτον μὲν, ὅσην εὔνοιαν ἔχων ἐγὼ διατελῶ TH πόλει καὶ 
28 πᾶσιν ὑμῖν, τοσαύτην ὑπάρξαι μοι εἰς τουτονὶ τὸν ἀγῶνα, 5 
᾿ Ψ ae , δ Ν Ν 3 , a \ 
ἔπειθ᾽ 6 τι μέλλει συνοίσειν Kal πρὸς εὐδοξίαν κοινῇ καὶ 
\ A A A rapes \ 
πρὸς εὐσέβειαν ἑκάστῳ, τοῦτο παραστῆσαι πᾶσιν ὑμῖν περὶ 
ιςπ “ la a 
ταυτησὶ τῆς γραφῆς γνῶναι. 
3 \ 3 ΑΨ, Ὁ 297 4 / > ΄ 
 Εΐ μὲν οὖν περὶ ὧν ἐδίωκε μόνον κατηγόρησεν Αἰσχίνης, 9 
3 Ἂν ." “A ‘al Ἂς x 
κἀγὼ περὶ αὐτοῦ τοῦ προβουλεύματος εὐθὺς ἂν ἀπελογούμην", 
XN > ol + Ν 
ἐπειδὴ δ᾽ οὐκ ἐλάττω λόγον τἄλλα διεξιὼν ἀνήλωκε καὶ τὰ 
an , A > \ 
“πλεῖστα κατεψεύσατό μου, ἀναγκαῖον εἶναι νομίζω καὶ δίκαιον 
Ψ "A Ss » 3 ~ \ / > A A 
ἅμα βραχέα, ὦ ἄνδρες ᾿Αθηναῖοι, περὶ τούτων εἰπεῖν πρῶτον, 5 
ὃ 8. 1. βίου om. Ar’, O. 2. βούλομαι καθάπερ ἐν ἀρχῇ vulg., om. V6; καθ. 
“ἐν ἀρχῃ om. Σ, 1..,.Α1..2.. 3. ἐνακμτίων Θ.-- 4. ἐγὼ om. Y. τῇ πόλει D', L; 
TH τε πόλει Vulg. 5. μοι D1, L1, A2; μοι παρ᾽ ὑμῶν vulg. 6. μέλλοι V6, O 
(corr.). 7. παραστῆσαι MSS.; παραστῆναι Bk., Bl. τοὺς θεοὺς (after παραστῆσαι) 
vulg.;-om. 2, L}, Az. 


§9. 3. λόγων Ol. ἀνάλωκε B. ‘Ae 
τον Σ', L, A2; πρῶτον εἰπεῖν = (corr.), vulg. 


πλείω Α 2. 5. εἰπεῖν πρῶ- 


8 8. τ. λόγον διδόναι, fo render an 6. ὅ τι... ἑκάστῳ: see note on ὅπερ... 
account, used often of the formal accounts δόξης, ὃ 14. 
which all officers of state rendered at the 7. παραστῆσαι: sc, τοὺς θεούς (subj.), 


εὔθυναι: see Aesch. III. 11, 12, and cf. 
§ 624 (below), λόγον...λαβεῖν. 


as in ὃ 1°.—totTo γνῶναι, Zo give that 
judgment. 


i EE πςο οὕς 


In §§ 9—52 the orator replies to 
charges which are foreign to the indict- 
ment (ἔξω τῆς γραφῆς). We have (1) an 

introduction in § 9; then (2) he speaks of 
his private-life in 88 10, 11; then (3) of 
his public policy in 88 12—52. 
Under (3) we have an introduction 
. (88 12—16), and the defence of his policy 
concerning the Peace of Philocrates (§§ 17 
—52). The last contains an introduction 
(§ 17), the narration (88 18—49), and the 
conclusion (§§ 50—52). 

$9. τ. εἰ,. κατηγόρησεν, i.e. if he 
had confined his accusation (in his speech) 
to the charges in his indictment (γραφή) : 
see the same distinction between κατη- 
*yopet and κρίνει in ὃ 15. 


2. προβουλεύματος : the strict name 
of a bill which had passed only the 
Senate, though the less exact ψήφισμα was 
often applied to it: see § 56'.—evOUs ἂν 
ἀπελογούμην, J should at once proceed (lit. 
be now proceeding) to my defence, etc. Cf. 
§ 34%. 

3. οὐκ ἐλάττω, guite as much (as in 
his proper accusation).—TdAAa διεξιὼν 
belongs to both ἀνήλωκε and κατεψεύσατο. 
- τὰ πλεῖστα : the antithesis to the comp. 
οὐκ ἐλάττω seems to show that the superl. 
is to be taken literally. The statements 
repudiated by Demosthenes about his 
private life and the Peace of Philocrates 
can well be said to ovtneumber all the 
others. 


10 


5 


Io 


14 AHMOZOENOY2 


ἵνα μηδεὶς ὑμῶν τοῖς ἔξωθεν λόγοις ἠγμένος ἀλλοτριώτερον 
τῶν ὑπὲρ τῆς γραφῆς δικαίων ἀκούῃ μου. & 

Περὶ μὲν δὴ τῶν ἰδίων ὅσα λοιδορσμενας βεβλασφήμηκε 
περὶ ἐμοῦ, θεάσασθε ὡς ἁπλᾶ καὶ δίκαια λέγω. εἰ μὲν ἴστε 
με τοιοῦτον οἷον οὗτος ἠτιᾶτο (οὐ γὰρ ἀλλοθί που βεβίωκα 
ἢ παρ᾽ ὑμῖν), μηδὲ φωνὴν ἀνάσχησθε, μηδ᾽ εἰ πάντα τὰ 
κοινὰ ὑπέρευ πεπολίτευμαι, ἀλλ᾽ ἀναστάντες καταψηφίσασθε 
ἤδη: εἰ δὲ πολλῷ βελτίω τούτου καὶ ἐκ βελτιόνων, καὶ 
μηδενὸς τῶν μετρίων, ἵνα μηδὲν ἐπαχθὲς λέγω, χείρονα καὶ 
ἐμὲ καὶ τοὺς ἐμοὺς ὑπειλήφατε καὶ γιγνώσκετε, τούτῳ μὲν 
μηδ᾽ ὑπὲρ τῶν ἄλλων πιστεύετε (δῆλον γὰρ ὡς ὁμοίως ἅπαντ᾽ 
ἐπλάττετο), ἐμοὶ δ᾽, ἣν παρὰ πάντα τὸν χρόνον εὔνοιαν 
ἐνδέδειχθε ἐπὶ πολλῶν ἀγώνων τῶν πρότερον, καὶ νυνὶ παρά- 


6. “Τοῖς ἕξω. 


§10. 1. δὴ ἤν: ©. 3. avros O. 
(yp). πάντα κοίν᾽ ΟἹ. 5. vmepev Σ. 
om. V6. 8. τούτῳ μὲν δὴ Y. se a 


γεγενημένων At (mg.). 2 (mg.), B, vulg. 


6. ἀλλοτριώτερον, less kindly (with 
greater alienation). 

7. Tov...dikatov: like δίκαια, ἃ 7%. 
Two genitives with ἀκούω are rare, though 
either alone is common,—trép: in the 
same sense as περί, as often in the orators, 
who, however, often observe the common 
distinction. Cf.§ r4and §11? “5, and XxIII. 
19, τοὺς περὶ τῶν νόμων λόγους ἀ 

The reply in 88 10, 11 to the charges 
against his private life and character 
amounts merely to a scornful refusal to 
discuss them, and an appeal to the judges 
to decide the case at once against him if 
they believe them. 

8 10. 1. περὶ τῶν ἰδίων: with ὅσα 
βεβλασφήμηκε (not with λέγω), the omitted 
antec. of. the cognate ὅσα being under- 


‘stood as limiting θεάσασθε... λέγω, as re- 


gards all the calumnies which he has 
abusively uttered about my private life. 
The whole sentence περὶ μὲν... λέγω is 
parallel to ὑπὲρ μὲν...ἐξετάσω in § 11°. 
(West., .Β].)--λοιδορούμενος βεβλασφή- 
pyke: for the relation of λοιδορία and 
βλασφημία to κατηγορία see § 1237. Cf. 
Cic. Cael. 3, 6: accusatio crimen de- 


4. Kal μηδὲ Az. φωνήν pov L 
καταψηφίσασθαι Σ, Οἱ. η. καὶ 
τῶν πρότερον Σ, L}, Ar. 2, V6; τῶν πρότ. 


siderat, rem ut definiat, hominem ut 
notet, argumento probet, teste confirmet ; 
maledictio autem nihil habet propositi 
praeter contumeliam. βλαφημία is slan- 
der, a special form of λοιδορία, abuse in 
general. Our word dlasphemy (like many 
others) never goes beyond the special 
meaning which it derives from the ecclesi- 


v. . astical Greek: cf, azegel, apostle, hypocrite, 


liturgy, etc. 
3. τοιοῦτον: 
So χείρονα (1. 7). 
4. μηδὲ φωνὴν ἀνάσχησθε = μηδὲ 
φθεγγόμενόν με ἀνάσχησθε, i.e. stop my 


sc. ὄντα, (M. T. grt). 


speech at once.—mdvTa τὰ κοινὰ : i.e. they 


may settle the case without reference to 
his public acts. 

6. βελτίω kal ἐκ βελτιόνων, better and 
better born, a common expression: cf. 
XXII. 63, 68; and ris ὧν καὶ τίνων, § 126° 
(below). See Terent. Ph. i. 2, 65, bonam 
bonis prognatam. 

7. μηδενὸς τῶν μετρίων χείρονα, i.e, 
guite as good as any of our respectable 
citizens : this moderate expression is made 
more effective by ἵνα... λέγω : see ἃ 1267. 

11. ἐπὶ πολλῶν ἀγώνων: see 88 249, 


, 
πὰ νυν“ ΝΥΝ ΎΨΨΌΩΟΡΌ 


TEP! TOY 2TE®ANOY 15 


A oxeobe. κακοήθης δ᾽ ὦν, Αἰσχίνη, τοῦτο παντελῶς εὔηθες 11 
φήθης, τοὺς περὶ τῶν πεπραγμένων καὶ πεπολιτευμένων 
λόγους ἀφέντα με πρὸς τὰς λοιδορίας τὰς παρὰ σοῦ τρέψε- 

29 σθαι. οὐ δὴ ποιήσω τοῦτο: οὐχ οὕτω τετύφωμαι: ἀλλ᾽ 

Psat, | \ la ΄, a “ὃ Ν ὃ ΄ 

ὑπὲρ μὲν τῶν πεπολιτευμένων ἃ κατεψεύδου καὶ διέβαλλες 5 
ἐξετάσω, τῆς O€ πομπείας ταύτης τῆς ἀνέδην γεγενημένης 
ὕστερον, ἂν βουλομένοις ἀκούειν n τουτοισὶ, μνησθήσομαι. 


§ 11. 2. rovs (corr. fr. του) Σ. 3. τρέψασθαι At. Ki 


διέβαλες Y, VO. © 


6. ἐξετάσω =, L, B, F, Φ, Y, V6; αὐτίκα ἐξετ. vulg. 
(ε over dt) 2; ἀναίδην ΑΙ, B, vulg., Prisc. 11. 181. 


οὑτωσὶ om. Σ, 1.1, Ar. 2, V6. ve 


ἀνέδην L, A2, V6; ἀνάιδην 
οὑτωσὶ γεγενημένης vulg. ; 


βουλομένοις ἀκούειν Σ, L, B (mg.), Ar. 2, V6; 
βουλ. τούτοις ἀκούειν vulg.; ἀκούειν om. B, F, Y, BI. 


F, &, Y, V6; τούτοις Ar, F (mg.), vulg.; ταυτησὶ L. 


τοὐτοισὲ ΣΦ; L (yp), Ar, B, 


250, where he speaks of being brought 
to trial “daily” after the battle of 
Chaeronea. 

δ 11. 1. κακοήθης.. εὔηθες φήθης : 
an untranslateable παρονομασία, the sar- 
castic effect of which, as pronounced by 
Demosthenes, can easily be imagined. 
- κακοήθης, tl/-natured, malicious, is in 
antithesis to εὔηθες, good-natured (in the 
double sense of our szle). The idea 
(imperfectly expressed) is : malicious (2ll- 
natured) fellow though you are, you con- 
\ ceived this perfectly simple (silly) notion. 
Demosthenes seldom uses this figure ; 
but in XXI. 207 we have a play on the 
name of Eubulus: ἀλλ᾽ εἰ κακῶς ἐμὲ 
βούλει ποιεῖν, Ἐὔβουλε. 

2. πεπραγμένων καὶ πεπολιτευμένων : 
see note on § 45. These words are re- 
peated in sense in πεπολιτευμένων (5), but 
the same figure immediately follows in 
κατεψεύδου καὶ διέβαλλες. ; 

4. τετύφωμαι : οἵ. τετυφῶσθαι, IX. 20. 
See Harpocr.: ἀντὶ τοῦ ἐμβεβρόντημαι, 
ἔξω τῶν φρενῶν γέγονα, ἤτοι ἀπὸ τῆς 
βροντῆς, ἢ ἀπὸ “τῶν ἐπὶ τὸν Τυφῶνα ἀνα- 
φερομένων σκηπτῶν, ἢ ἀπὸ τῶν Τυφωνικῶν 
καλουμένων πνευμάτων, ἃ δὴ καὶ αὐτὰ ἐξί- 
στησιν ἀθρόως καταρραγέντα. ᾿Αλκαῖος, 
“ἐ πάμπαν δὲ Τυφὼς ἔκ σ᾽ ἕλετο φρένας." 
Δημοσθ. ὑπὲρ Kryo. If τυφόω is thus 
connected with Τυφῶν or Tudds, τετύ- 
gwuac must mean_/ am distracted or 
crazed, like ἐμβρόντητος (§ 243’). If it is 


derived from τῦφος, mist or smoke (see 
Lidd. ἃ Sc.), τετύφωμαι means 7) ant stupe- 
fied, befogged or wrapt in smoke. 

6. πομπείας, ribaldry ( procession-talk). 
See Harpocr.: πομπείας καὶ πομπεύειν 
ἀντὶ τοῦ λοιδορίας καὶ λοιδορεῖν. μετα- 
φέρει δὲ ἀπὸ τών ἐν ταῖς Διονυσιακαῖς πομ- 
παῖς ἐπὶ τῶν ἁμαξῶν λοιδορουμένων ἀλλή- 
λοις. Μένανδρος ἹΠερινθίᾳ, “ἐπὶ τῶν 
ἁμαξῶν εἰσι πομπεῖαί τινες σφόδρα λοί- 
dopo.’ The Scholia have: πομπείας, 
λοιδορίας, ὕβρεως" ἐν ταῖς πομπαῖς mpoo- 
wreid τινες φοροῦντες ἀπέσκωπτον τοὺς 
ἄλλους, ὡς ἐν ἑορτῇ παίζοντες, ἐπὶ ἁμαξῶν 
φερόμενοι. See ἐξ ἁμάξης, § 122°, and 
Suidas quoted in note; and πομπεύειν, 
$ 124%. The chorus of mystae in the 
Frogs (416—430) gives a vile specimen, 
which probably exaggerates the genuine 
πομπεία.--- ἀνέδην, loosely, without check : 
cf. dvinus and ἄνεσις. ‘Vhe Scholia recog- 
nize the false reading ἀναίδην (διὰ τῆς 
διφθόγγου) as equivalent to ἀναισχύντως. 

7. ἂν. -τουτοισὶ : zf these (judges) 
shall wish to hear tt. See Thuc..vi. 46, 
τῷ Νικίᾳ προσδεχομένῳ ἦν, and other 
examples in M.T. goo. Whiston com- 
pares Liv. XXI. 50, quibusdam volentibus 
novas res fore. | 

§§ 12—16. After thus dismissing the 
private charges as unworthy of a reply, 
he comes to the charges against his con- 
duct with regard to the Peace of Philo- 
crates in 346 B.c. In this introduction 


13 ἀξίαν λαβεῖν, οὐδ᾽ ἐγγύς. 


16 AHMOZOENOY> 


Ta μὲν οὖν κατηγορημένα πολλὰ, Kal περὶ ὧν ἐνίων 
μεγάλας καὶ τὰς ἐσχάτας Ol νόμοι διδόασι τιμωρίας" τοῦ 
δὲ παρόντος ἀγῶνος ἡ προαίρεσις αὕτη" ἐχθροῦ μὲν ἐπήρειαν 
ἔχει καὶ ὕβριν καὶ λοιδορίαν καὶ προπηλακισμὸν ὁμοῦ καὶ 
5πάντα τὰ τοιαῦτα" τῶν μέντοι κατηγοριῶν καὶ τῶν αἰτιῶν 
τῶν εἰρημένων, εἴπερ ἦσαν ἀληθεῖς, οὐκ ἔνι τῇ πόλει δίκην 


§ 12. 1. 
A2, ᾧ (yp), B (yp) 
αὐτὴ AI, Δ Ὁ. i 
» 4. ὁμοῦ Σ (not ἐμοῦ as stated), L, vulg. 


; TaTTovet L (YP), νας. 


πολλὰ Σ, 1,1, Ar. 2, V6; πολλὰ καὶ δεινὰ vulg. 2. 


5 Ν ΓΤ ι an Ν A 
ov yap ἀφαιρεῖσθαι τὸ προσελ- 


διδόασι Σ, L, 
ἃς. duTn’ (thus) Σ ; αὕτη Φ; αὐτή L; 


ἐπήρειαν & (yp), L?, vulg.; προαίρεσιν =; empoapeow Lh 


6. &S (yp), L?, Ατ ; ἐστὶ and ἑνὶ ΑἹ 


Θ..οιν. -)3 ἔχε ΣᾺ ΤᾺΣ A2; erl L(corr.), Y, V6. 


Ὁ 158. Lis 
vulg. 


ἀφαιρεῖσθαι Σ (with later δεῖ crowded into the line); ἀφαιρεῖσθαι δεῖ 


he dwells on the outrage of bringing such 
grave charges against a statesman in a 
way which neither allows the accused a 
fair opportunity to defend himself, nor 
gives the state any adequate remedy 
against him if he is guilty, while it may 
entail grave consequences on an innocent 
person. 

8 12. 1. περὶ ὧν ἐνίων, about which 
Zn some cases: ἐνίων qualifies ὧν (West.). 
Cf. 111. 11, τοὺς περὶ τῶν στρατ. ἐνίους, 
and XXVII. 23, καὶ ὅσα ἔνια ; also Thuc. I. 
6, ἐν τοῖς βαρβάροις ἔστιν οἷς. 

3. ἣ προαίρεσις αὕτη᾽ (so Σ): αὕτη" 
is much more expressive than αὐτή (with 
no stop), pointing vividly to the follow- 
ing statement of the true purpose of 
Aeschines. It also gives τῶν μέντοι 
κατηγοριῶν «.T.d. (5) its proper relation 
to ἐχθροῦ μέν. The Schol. charges this 
passage with ἀσάφεια πολλή. The thought 
is as follows:—-The charges include 
some of the gravest known to the law, 
which provides the severest penalties for 
the offences; but this suit was never 
brought to punish anybody for these. I 
will tell you what its object is (αὕτη) : it 
is to give a personal enemy an oppor- 
tunity to vent his spite and malice, while 
it gives the state no means of properly 
punishing my crimes if I am_ guilty. 
The first clause, τὰ μὲν... τιμωρίας (1, 2), 
states the gravity of the actual charges, 
and is opposed to the following τοῦ δὲ... 


αὕτη. The latter introduces the double 
construction, (a) ἐχθροῦ μὲν... τοιαῦτα and 
(ὁ) τῶν wévro...008 ἐγγύς, in which the 
motive of Aeschines and the inadequacy 
of this suit to deal with the alleged 
crimes are declared. The last two 
clauses are confirmed, (a) by οὐ γὰρ... 
δίκαιόν ἐστιν (δ 13'*), (6) by ἀλλ᾽ ἐφ᾽ οἷς 
... ypapouevoy (8 13. ). Finally, οὐ yap 
δήπου... ἐγράψατο (ὃ 13”) shows that 
Aeschines, by his present action, virtually 
admits that the course just pointed out 
(ἐφ᾽ οἷς.. .«γραφόμενον) is the only consistent 
one.—émypevav, malice (cf. ὃ 137): see 
ἐπηρεάζω, maliciously insult, 88 1384, 
320°. 
4+ ἔχει, znvolves, contains. -ὁμοῦ : this 
(not ἐμοῦ) is the only reading of 2. - 

6. εἴπερ ἦσαν ἀληθεῖς, «ἡ verae erant 
(not 455 6711), a simple supposition, with 
nothing implied as to its truth: there is 


-no need of reading οὐκ ἐνῆν in the apo- : 


dosis.—ovK ἔνι, ἐξ zs not possible, i.e. by 
this suit. οὐκ ἔχει (2, L') would be in 
strong antithesis to ἔχει (4) with the 
same subject, ὁ παρὼν ἀγών : West. 
translates this dzetet ste nicht die Moglich- 
keit. But is ὁ ἀγὼν οὐκ ἔχει τῇ πόλει 
δίκην λαβεῖν a possible construction in 
this sense ? 

7. οὐδ᾽ ἐγγύς (sc. ἀξίαν), nor anything 
like tt. 

§ 13. Here the orator gives the most — 
striking proof of his adversary’s malicious 


ΠΕΡΙ 


4 


TOY 2TE®ANOY 


17 


δεν pie ae \ δ re "5: 7 ἡ , (ἕ \ 
Ἵ HRY και ογου τυχειν-τ-τ-ου εν ETN) PELAS TQACEL Και 


, an A ¥ \ \ Vets κι ¥ ¥ . 
φθόνου τοῦτο Tovety—ovTe μὰ τοὺς θεοὺς ὀρθῶς ἔχον οὔτε 


πολιτικὸν οὔτε δίκαιόν ἐστιν, ὦ ἄνδρες ᾿Αθηναῖοι: ἀλλ᾽ ἐφ᾽ 


® ὃ A , 5. εν» \ ΄ (ΟΝ aes ἐκ Ἷ ΄ εὖ 
οἷς ἀδικοῦντα μ᾽ ἑώρα τὴν πόλιν, οὐσί γε τηλικούτοις ἡλίκα 5 


νῦν ἐτραγῴδει Kal διεξήει, ταῖς ἐκ τῶν νόμων τιμωρίαις παρ᾽ 


3 \ > 7, “A > Ἂς 5 Ὺ + δ 3 
αὐτὰ τἀδικήματα χρῆσθαι, εἰ μὲν εἰσαγγελίας ἄξια πράττονθ 


ere 5 , AY a Ν / 3 ,ὕὔ 
ewpa, εἰσαγγέλλοντα καὶ τοῦτον τὸν τρόπον εἰς κρίσιν καθι. 


7. χρήσασθαι L, vulg. 


πράττοντα Σ, 1.1 ; πράττοντά με vulg. - 


purpose (ἐχθροῦ ἐπήρειαν), viz. his bring- 
ing a form of suit by which he hoped to 
deprive Demosth. of the power to defend 
himself (λόγου τυχεῖν). It must be re- 
membered that Aesch. had not merel 

prosecuted Ctesiphon instead of Demosth., 
but had also (200—202) besought the 
judges most earnestly to refuse Demosth. 
permission to speak as Ctesiphon’s advo- 


_cate. 


I. οὐ γὰρ ἀφαιρεῖσθαι κ.τ.λ. : if we 
omit δεῖ after ἀφαιρεῖσθαι (see crit. note), 
ἀφαιρεῖσθαι and τοῦτο ποιεῖν with their 
adjuncts are subjects of οὔτε... ἔχον οὔτε 
πολιτικὸν οὔτε δίκαιόν ἐστιν, the negation 
of οὐ and οὐδ᾽ being thrice repeated in 
οὔτε. As we naturally omit οὐ in transla- 
tion (that we may translate οὔτε), we can 
give the emphatic οὐδ᾽ (2) the force of 
still more (dazu, Bl.), and translate, for 
to try to take away my right to come before 
the people and be heard—still more to do 
this by way of malice and spite—is neither 
right nor patriotic (see note on 4) nor 
just. ἀφαιρεῖσθαι is conative (cf. ὃ 207%). 
For ἀφαιρεῖσθαι as subject (where we 


might expect τὸ ἀφαιρεῖσθαι, were it not 


for the following τὸ προσελθεῖν), see 
Thue. 111. 38, ἀμύνασθαι δὲ, τῷ παθεῖν ὅτι 
ἐγγυτάτω κείμενον, ἀντίπαλον ὃν μάλιστα 
τὴν τιμωρίαν ἀναλαμβάνει, and II. 87, 
περιγίγνεται...ναυμαχεῖν. --τὸ προσελθεῖν 
εὐτυχεῖν here is the right of every accused 
citizen to be heard before the popular 
court, which is here called δῆμος, as when 
it is addressed ἄνδρες ᾿Αθηναῖοι. 

2. ἐν ἐπηρείας τάξει, by way of (vent- 


. ing) malice: cf. § 63°, ἐν τῇ... τάξει, and 


XX. 81, ἐν ἐχθροῦ μέρει. Similar is 111. 31, 
G. ΤῊΣ 


| ἫΝ 5-(eS αὖ, Amp ον 


3 e 


ἐν ὑπηρέτου καὶ προσθήκης μέρει. 

3. οὔτε.. οὔτε... οὔτε after ov: see 
Eur. frag. 322 (N.), οὐκ ἔστιν οὔτε τεῖχος 
οὔτε χρήματα οὔτ᾽ ἄλλο δυσφύλακτον οὐδὲν 
ὡς γυνή. ---ὀρθῶς ἔχον: stronger than 
ὀρθόν. 

4. πολιτικὸν, properly Jdelonging to 
the state (see ὃ 246°), here due ¢o the state 
from a citizen: cf. X. 74, οὐκ ἴσως. οὐδὲ 
πολιτικῶς. Such conduct, it is meant, is 
not fatr to the state. In 1X. 48, πολιτικῶς 
refers to the simple old-fashioned Spartan 
style of warfare.—ép’ ots...édpa: the 
condensed form for ἐπὶ τοῖς ἀδικήμασιν ἃ 
ἀδικοῦντά με ἑώρα: cf. § 14). 

5. οὖσι τηλικούτοις (=el ἣν τηλι- 
καῦτα), supposing them to have been so 
great. 

6. ἐτραγῴδει καὶ διεξήει (see note on 
§ 4°), set forth in hes tragic style (i.e. 
pompously), referring to the theatrical 
days of Aeschines, like ὑποκρίνεται, ὃ 154. 
Cf. XIX. 189, ταῦτα τραγῳδεῖ.---παρ᾽, at 
the time of. . 

7. χρῆσθαι (sc. δίκαιον ἦν, supplied 
from δίκαιόν ἐστιν in 1. 4), Ae ought to 
have employed. 

8. εἰσαγγέλλοντα and γραφόμενον 
(to) express the manner of χρῆσθαι, and 
with it make the apodoses to the condi- 
tions εἰ... ἑώρα and εἰ... παράνομα ᾿ (sc. 
ἑώρα) : cf. ἐφ᾽ οἷς ἑώρα (4). εἰσαγγέλλω is 
to indict by εἰσαγγελία, as γράφομαι is 
(properly) to zmdict by ordinary γραφή. 
Notice the distinction between γράφοντα 
παράνομα, proposing illegal measures, and 
παρανόμων γραφόμενον, indicting for wllegal 
proposals. For the double meaning of 
the passive of γράφω see note on ὃ 56“, 


rod 3 


“7... “λα LeM δι ἃ 


ἢ 


ΓΨ 


᾿ 


ων, 14 ἐγράψατο. 


18 


ΔΗΛΛΟΣΘΕΝΟΥΣ 


στάντα παρ᾽ ὑμῖν, εἰ δὲ γράφοντα παράνομα, παρανόμων 
/ > Ἂς , A ΟΝ , ὃ 4 

10 γραφόμενον: ov yap δήπου Κτησιφῶντα μὲν δύναται διώκειν 

3 ιν SN > ¥ 3 ΄ ὦ + % > Δ 

du ἐμὲ, ἐμὲ δ᾽; εἴπερ ἐξελέγξειν ἐνόμιζεν, αὐτὸν οὐκ ἂν 


καὶ μὴν εἴ τι τῶν ἄλλων ὧν νυνὶ διέβαλλε καὶ 


/ x Nines 5. Ὁ a) > A he Eas ev 94'S / ; 
διεξήει ἢ Kal GAN ὁτιοῦν ἀδικοῦντά με ὑμᾶς ἑώρα, εἰσὶ νόμοι 


περὶ πάντων καὶ τιμωρίαι, καὶ ἀγῶνες καὶ κρίσεις πικρὰ καὶ 
μεγάλα ἔχουσαι τἀπιτίμια, καὶ τούτοις ἐξῆν ἅπασιν χρῆσθαι: 
καὶ ὁπηνίκ᾽ ἐφαίνετο ταῦτα πεποιηκὼς καὶ τοῦτον τὸν τρόπον 
κεχρημένος τοῖς πρός με, ὡμολογεῖτ᾽ ἂν ἡ κατηγορία τοῖς 


ἔργο ις αὐτοῦ. 


‘a > 3 Ν ~ > “A Ν 6 ε ~ Ν 
νῦν δ᾽ ἐκστὰς τῆς ὀρθῆς καὶ δικαίας ὁδοῦ καὶ 


φυγὼν τοὺς παρ᾽ αὐτὰ τὰ πράγματα ἐλέγχους, τοσούτοις 


ΤΊ: 
"ἰὸς Το" 
(only mg. w. ©). 4: 
πᾶσι At, V6. 
με Σ ; πρὸς ἐμὲ L, vulg. 
815. 2. 


το. οὐ γὰρ... ἐγράψατο : οὐ γὰρ δήπου 
belongs to both clauses Κτησ. μὲν and 
ἐμὲ δ᾽ x.7.d.: for it surely cannot be that 
he is prosecuting Ctesiphon on my account, 
and yet would not have indicted me if 
etc. Without words like μέν and δέ to 
mark the two antithetical clauses, which 


_ are negatived jointly, but not severally, 


this common rhetorical figure would be 
impossible. The Latin uses guzdem and 
sed in such expressions for μέν and δέ, 
but with less effect : see note on § 179%. 


11. δι ἐμὲ, ἐμὲ 8°: emphatic repeti- 
tion. 
814. 1. εἴ τι... ἑώρα: 27 he ever 


saw me etc., a simple supposition, to 
which εἰσὶ νόμοι and ἐξῆν are a natural 
apodosis ; ἐξῆν, he might, implies no un- 
real condition. Cf. ἐφ᾽ οἷς ἑώρα, ὃ 134.— 
ὧν... διέβαλλε καὶ διεξήει, 1.6. which he 
slanderously related: cf. § 13°. 

2—4. νόμοι.. .τἀπιτίμια : there is no 
tautology here. He first mentions /aws 
and their prescribed penalties (τιμωρίαι), 
which would be used in ἀγῶνες ἀτίμητοι ; 
then frocesses and (special) szz¢s, in which 
heavy penalties could be inflicted by vote 
of the court (ἀγῶνες τιμητοί). ἐπιτίμια, 
like τιμήματα, are especially penalties 


ἔχουσαι vulg.; ἔχοντες Σ (mg.), L', B (yp). 
χρῆσθαι =, L}, B, F, Y, 6, Ο ; χρῆσθαι κατ᾽ ἐμοῦ Ar, V6. 


ἐξελέγξειν Ar, V6; ἐξελέγχειν L, vulg., 2} (E over x). 
Kal τιμωρίαι after κρίσεις Ar, V6. 


πικρὰ...ἐπιτίμια vulg., 2 
ἐξῆν αὐτῷ 
6. πρός 


3) 4 


τὰ om. ΟἹ, with éA\éyxous...coKoupara. 


which the judges assess (τιμῶσι). (See 
Meier and Schomann, Att. Proc., pp. 
208—211, 956.) 

5. ὁπηνίκ᾽ ἐφαίνετο is so nearly 
equivalent to εἴ ποτε ἐφαίνετο (M. T. 528), 
that 27. he had ever been seen best translates 
it. It is often impossible to express an — 
unreal condition in English by a relative. 
sentence: here whenever he had been seen 
would not be clear. = 

6. κεχρημένος τοῖς πρός pe, fo have 
dealt with me (managed his relations to 
me): den Streit gegen mich so gefiihrt 
(Bl.). West. strangely renders τοῖς πρός 
με die auf mich anwendbaren Rechts- 
mittel, referring to νόμοι, ἀγῶνες, etc. (so 
Weil).—apodroyeir’ dv, would have been 
consistent, the impf. referring to the 
various occasions of κεχρημένος. If he 
had brought the proper suits (ayaves καὶ 
κρίσεις) against me personally at the time 
of each offence, his style of accusation — 
(κατηγορία) before the court would have 
been consistent with his conduct ; where- 
as Now κατηγορεῖ μὲν ἐμοῦ, κρίνει δὲ Tov- 
τονί (ὃ 154), the latter being his present 
ἔργον. : 

8156. 2. τοσούτοις ὕστερον χρόνοις: 
the Peace of Philocrates (of which he is 


ΠΕΡῚ TOY STEPANOY. 19 


ὕστερον χρόνοις αἰτίας Kal σκώμματα καὶ λοιδορίας συμ-᾿ 
φορήσας ὑποκρίνεται" εἶτα κατηγορεῖ μὲν ἐμοῦ, κρίνει δὲ 
τουτονὶ, καὶ τοῦ μὲν ἀγῶνος ὅλου τὴν πρὸς ἔμ᾽ ἔχθραν 5 
προΐσταται, οὐδαμοῦ δ᾽ ἐπὶ ταύτην ἀπηντηκὼς ἐμοὶ τὴν 
ἑτέρου ζητῶν ἐπιτιμίαν ἀφελέσθαι φαίνεται. καίτοι πρὸς 16 
ἅπασιν, ὦ ἄνδρες ᾿Αθηναῖοι, τοῖς ἄλλοις οἷς ἂν εἰπεῖν τις 
ὑπὲρ Κτησιφῶντος ἔχοι, καὶ τοῦτ᾽ ἔμοιγε δοκεῖ καὶ μάλ᾽ 
εἰκότως ἂν λέγειν, ὅτι τῆς ἡμετέρας ἔχθρας ἡμᾶς ἐφ᾽ ἡμῶν 
αὐτῶν δίκαιον ἣν τὸν ἐξετασμὸν ποιεῖσθαι, οὐ τὸ μὲν πρὸς 5 
ἀλλήλους ἀγωνίζεσθαι παραλείπειν, ἑτέρῳ δ᾽ ὅτῳ κακόν τι 


δώ σοι G3 


3, Ὁ να γαγὼν over συμφορήσας L. 


“~ ε ἢ, ἍΝ 5 / ΜᾺ / 
ζητεῖν: ὑπερβολὴ yap ἀδικίας τοῦτό γε. 
WTA μὲν τοίνυν τὰ κατηγορημέν᾽ ὁμοίως ἐκ τούτων ἂν 17 


ἅπασιν... ἔχοι Σ, L, ΑΖ2; τοῖς ἄλλοις δικαίοις Σ᾽ (yp), B, vulg.; 


δικαίοις over οἷς L?; ἅπασι τ. ἀλλ., ὦ ἄν. ᾽ΑΘ., οἷς ἄν τις εἰπεῖν... ἔχοι δικαίοις Ar, Νό. 


816. 2. 
3. τοῦτό γ᾽ ἐμοὶ Ar, V6. δοκοῖ Β. 
ἐξητασμὸν (ε over 7) Σ. 6. 
over ev) 1, ; παραλιπεῖν A2, ©. 

29. 740m. 1... 


especially speaking) was ten years old 
when Aesch. first brought his suit (336 
mes Je 

4. ὑποκρίνεται, he plays his part: cf. 
ἐτραγῴδει in ὃ 138. The word implies 
only pomposity but dissimulation, 


γορεῖ.. κρίνει: see note on § 14°. 

5. τοῦ ἀγῶνος ὅλου προΐσταται, he 
puts foremost in (at the head of) his whole 
sutt. 

6. οὐδαμοῦ, zowhere, 1.6, never: cf. 
οὗ in § 125! with following évratéa.—ém 
ταύτην, upon this ground (that of our 
enmity), keeping the figure of ἀπηντηκὼς 
éuol,—or with a view to this, i.e. to fight 
it out (West., Weil, /Bl.): cf. ἐνταῦθ᾽ 
ἀπήντηκας, ὃ 125%, / 

7. ἐπιτιμίαν ἀφελέσθαι, i.e. to inflict 
ἀτιμία, which Ctesiphon would incur as a 
public debtor if he were unable to pay his 
fine if convicted. The spurious indict- 
ment in § 55 sets this at fifty talents (see 
note on Hist. § 8). 

8 16. 3. δοκεῖ, personal, sc. Τίς (from 


καὶ μάλιστα (end) Φ. 5. αὑτῶν V6. 


s 


παραλειπεῖν (t over Ist εἰ) 23 παραλειπειν (yp. ow 


2): we translate 22 seems that one might 
say, because we must use a finite verb to 
express ἂν λέγειν (M. T. 754). 

5. δίκαιον ἦν, we ought (M. T. 416)? 
here of present time.—rov ἐξετασμὸν 
ποιεῖσθαι, 20 settle up. «“ἐξετασμός in 
der klass. Literatur nur hier: sonst ἐξέ- 
rags.” Bl. Bekk. Anecd. 93, 20, says of 


its use here, οὔ φασι δόκιμον εἶναι οὕτω 


τιθέμενον.᾿ Cf. ἐξέτασιν ποιήσειν, ὃ 226%. 

6. ἑτέρῳ ὅτῳ.. ζητεῖν, 20 seck what 
other man we can harm, ἑτέρῳ standing 
emphatically before the indirect interrog. 
ὅτῳ: the direct question would be ἑτέρῳ 
Tivt...ddcouev; Weil, who makes ὅτῳ a 
common relative, with ἑτέρῳ assimilated, 
quotes Aen. I. 573, urbem quam statuo 
vestra est. But we hardly expect this 
‘‘inverted assimilation” (G. 1035) in the 
language of this speech. 


For the argument of §§ 17—52 on 
the Peace of Philocrates, with its three 
divisions, see note before ὃ 9. 

8 17. 1. ὁμοίως with πάντα, all 
alike. 


2—2 


“ 


= “18 


_ making the peace: see I. 174, τὴν εἰρήνην᾽ 


20 


PSS ΨΥ Ψ.. tll hh 
. 


AHMO20ENOY2 


» »» fi Let Oe ae eR / > A > , 
τις ἴδοι οὔτε δικαίως οὐτ᾽ ἐπ᾽ ἀληθείας οὐδεμιᾶς εἰρημένα" 
, \ \ 9. «ἃ ν pe oe > Maes - a , > 

βούλομαι δὲ καὶ καθ᾽ ἕν ἕκαστον αὐτῶν ἐξετάσαι, Kal μάλισθ 
ὅσα ὑπὲρ τῆς εἰρήνης καὶ τῆς πρεσβείας κατεψεύσατό μου, 
a A 
57a πεπραγμέν᾽ ἑαυτῷ μετὰ Φιλοκράτους ἀνατιθεὶς ἐμοί. ἔστι 
δ᾽ ἀναγκαῖον, ὦ ἄνδρες ᾿Αθηναῖοι, καὶ προσῆκον ἴσως, ὡς 
3 ον lal 
κατ᾽ ἐκείνους τοὺς χρόνους εἶχε τὰ πράγματ᾽ ἀναμνῆσαι, 
Ὁ Ν Ν ε ΄, Ν y “Ἂ 
αἰνα πρὸς τὸν ὑπάρχοντα καιρὸν ἕκαστα θεωρῆτε. 
lal Ν A , 2 > Ν 
Tov γὰρ Φωκικοῦ συστάντος πολέμου, οὐ Ov ἐμὲ (οὐ γὰρ 
»»Ἤ A al a 
ἔγωγε ἐπολιτευόμην πω τότε), πρῶτον μὲν ὑμεῖς οὕτω διέ. 
A / \ ΄ Ἂ ΄ 3 
κεισθε ὥστε Φωκέας μὲν βούλεσθαι σωθῆναι, καίπερ οὐ 
,ὔὕ a) ε lal rd 2s 76 A x > A 
δίκαια ποιοῦντας ὁρῶντες, Θηβαίοις δ᾽ ὁτιοῦν ἂν ἐφησθῆναι 


3. καὶ (bef. καθ᾽) om. V6. 
ἕκαστον At, V6; καθ᾽ ἕκαστ᾽ Bl. 4. 


§18. τὶ 
vulg. 2. 
οῦν ἐὰν VO. 


πολέμου συστάντος At. 


2. ἐπ᾽ ἀληθείας οὐδεμιᾶς, with 710 re- 
gard to truth.—eipynpéva: or. οὐδ. with 
ἴδοι ἄν. Bl. puts a comma after ἴδοι. 

3. καθ᾽ ἕν, szmgly: θαρροῦντός ἐστιν 
ἄγαν τὸ βούλεσθαι καὶ κατὰ μέρος ἐξετάζειν 
τὰ πράγματα. Schol.—éxaorov: obj. of 
ἐξετάσαι (West.): cf. καθ᾽ ἕνα ἕκαστον 
ἡμῶν ἀποστερεῖν, ΧΧΙ. 142. Bl. omits ἕν 
and reads ἕκαστ᾽ (=). But it may be right 
to read καθ᾽ ἕν ἕκαστ᾽ αὐτών ἐξετάσαι: cf. 
χωρὶς ἕκαστα σκοποῦντες, XXIII. 21. 

4. ὑπὲρ (like zepl),: see note on § 9’. 

5. ἀνατιθεὶς ἐμοί, putting upon me. 
Originally Aeschines prided himself on 
his close connection with Philocrates in 


τὴν δι’ ἐμοῦ καὶ Φιλοκράτους γεγενημένην. 
(See Hist. § 31.) 

6. Kal προσῆκον tows, and becoming 
as well (as necessary): tows, ὁμοίως 
(Schol.). 

7. ἀναμνῆσαι: sc. 
added in most Mss. 
ὑπομνῆσαι πειράσομαι. 

8. πρὸς... καιρὸν, with reference to tts 


ὑμᾶς, which is 
Cf. xx. 76, ταῦθ᾽ 


special occasion (that which de/onged to it). 


§ 18. 1. Φωκικοῦ πολέμου: the 
Sacred or Phocian War began-in 356— 
355 and ended in 346 B.c. Demosthenes 


ποτε (from τότε) = (yp), Β', F, Φ, ΟἹ, 8: 


καθ᾽ ἕν ἕκαστον vulg.; καθ᾽ ἕν ἐκαστ᾽ Σ ; καθ᾽ 
ὅσα ye O. 6. 
μνῆσαι Σ, L,A2; ἀναμνῆσαι ἡμᾶς Ο ; ἀναμ. ὑμᾶς vulg. 


ὦ om. ᾧ. 7. ἀνα- 
8. θεωρειτε (ἢ over εἰ) V6. 
οὐ yap Σ,1,, Ar. 2, V6; οὐ γὰρ δὴ B, 

ἐβούλεσθε. 4. ὅτι- 


made his first speech in the Assembly 
(on the Symmories) in 354 B.c. (See. 
Hist. §§ 4, 11} 

2. οὕτω διέκεισθε: when we com- 
pare this judicious account of the feelings 
of the Athenians towards the Phocians 
and Thebans in 346 B.C. and earlier with 
the impassioned language of the speech 
on the Embassy and of the Second and — 
Third Philippics, we see the sobering 
effect of time and of recent events. When 
the Thebans were exulting in the devasta- 
tion of Phocis by Philip, and the political 
interests of Athens demanded that the 
Phocians should be protected as allies, 


Demosthenes seemed to overlook their 


sacrilegious plundering of Delphi, which 
he now acknowledges. Again, the inti- 
mate alliance of Thebes and Athens in 
339 B.C., and still more the destruction of 
Thebes by Alexander in 335, had changed 
the Athenians’ bitter hatred to the deepest 
sympathy. Still the orator cannot deny 
the old hostility against Thebes, nor the 
chief ground for it. 

4. (ὥστε) ὁτιοῦν ἂν ἐφησθῆναι πα- 
θοῦσιν: see M. T. 592 and 211. It is 
often hard to express in English’ the 
fundamental distinction between the infin. 


TEP] TOY STEPANOY 21 


a 3 τὸν ass OOF > A > , - 
παθοῦσιν, ουκ ἀλόγως οὐὸ ἀδίκως QUTOLS ὀργιζόμενοι: ous 5 


Ν 5 oa > 4 5 - 5 4 », 5 
γὰρ εὐτυχήκεσαν ἐν Λεύκτροις οὐ μετρίως ἐκέχρηντο: ἔπειθ 
ἢ Πελοπόννησος ἅπασα διειστήκει, Kal ov οἱ μισοῦντες 
Λακεδαιμονίους οὕτως ἴσχυον ὥστε ἀνελεῖν αὐτοὺς, OVO οἱ 
πρότερον du ἐκείνων ἄρχοντες κύριοι τῶν πόλεων ἦσαν, ἀλλά 

ον ν . \ Ν , \ ᾿, A ΕΣ Ψ 
τις ἄκριτος καὶ παρὰ τούτοις καὶ παρὰ TOLS ἄλλοις ἀπασιν 
Epis καὶ ταραχή. ταῦτα δ᾽ ὁρῶν ὁ Φίλιππος (οὐ yap ἣν 


6. εὐτετυχήκεσαν Νό. τὸ, παρὰ τοῖς ὅλλοις Σ, L, Ar. 2, V6; παρὰ om. B, 
vulg. ἅπασιν Σ' (Ἕλλησιν above), B; ἅπασιν Ἕλλησιν L, At, V 6, F (yp), ® 


(yp), O. 


| and the finite moods with ὥστε, and often 
impossible when the infin. has ἄν and 
must therefore be translated by a finite 
verb. We should generally translate 
here, you were so disposed that you 
wished...and would have been pleased etc., 
as if we had ὥστε ἐβούλεσθε... ἐφήσθητε 
ἄν, whereas the thought is, you were (so) 
disposed (as) to wish...and to feel that 
you would be pleased etc., which is not 
the same (M.T. 584). See Gildersleeve 
in Amer. Jour. of Philol. v1I. 161—175. 
ἐφησθῆναι ἂν with its protasis παθοῦσιν, 
in its general sense, represents ἐφησθεῖμεν 
av εἰ πάθοιεν. The position of Φωκέας 
μὲν and Θηβαίοις δ᾽ shows their strong 
antithesis. 

5, 6. ols εὐτυχήκεσαν, their successes: 
sc. τοῖς εὐτυχήμασιν (obj. of ἐκέχρηντο). 
Cf. περὶ ὧν ἠγνωμονήκεσαν, ὃ 94°.—é& 
“Λεύκτροις : for the battle of Leuctra in 
371 B.C. see Grote x. Ch. 78. Bl. quotes 
Isoc. Phil. 53 on the effect of Leuctra 
upon the arrogance of Thebes. See xx. 
109, showing the bitter feeling of De- 
mosth. himself in 355 B.C.: μεῖζον On- 
Bato. φρονοῦσιν ἐπ’ ὠμότητι καὶ πονηρίᾳ 
ἢ ὑμεῖς ἐπὶ φιλανθρωπίᾳ καὶ τῷ τὰ δίκαια 
βούλεσθαι. Cf. Diod. xvi. 58, τὰ Λευκ- 
τρικὰ φρονήματα (Leuctric insolence) ov- 
στεῖλαι τῶν Βοιωτῶν. See note on § 98°. 

6. ἔκστειθ᾽, after πρῶτον μὲν: see note 
on § 14. 

ἡ. διειστήκει, was in dissension (dis- 
tracted).—ot μισοῦντες : these were espe- 
cially the Messenians and Arcadians, with 


their new cities Messene and Megalopo- 
lis, established by Epaminondas, and the 
Argives. See v.18: εἰ γὰρ ᾿Αργεῖοι μὲν 
καὶ Μεσσήνιοι καὶ Μεγαλοπολῖται καί 
τινες τῶν «λοιπῶν Πελοποννησίων ὅσοι 
ταὐτὰ τούτοις φρονοῦσιν διὰ τὴν πρὸς Λα- 
κεδαιμονίους ἡμῖν ἐπικηρυκείαν ἐχθρῶς 
σχήσουσι, κ.τ.λ.; and Xen. Hellen. 1. 
5, 11: τίς yap ἤδη καταλείπεται αὐτοῖς 
(Λακ.) εὐμενής ; οὐκ ᾿Αργεῖοι μὲν ἀεί ποτε 
δυσμενεῖς αὐτοῖς ὑπάρχουσιν ;" 

8, οἱ πρότερον ἄρχοντες are not the 
ἁρμοσταί and δεκαρχίαι of Lysander (8 
962), but oligarchies which were main- 
tained by Sparta in Peloponnesus before 
Leuctra and were overthrown by the 
later revolutions. For example, Phlius 
was captured by Agesilaus in 380 B.c., 
and a council of One Hundred was esta- 
blished there in the Spartan interest: in 
366 Phlius and Corinth made a treaty 
with Thebes which recognized their inde- 
pendence. (See Xen. Hellen. v. 3, 25; 
VII. 4, 10.) Mantinea was captured by 
Agesipolis in 385, and divided into five 
villages; in 371 the city was reestablished 
and was independent of Sparta (ibid. v. 
2, I—7}; VI. 5, 3-- 5). For the revolt of 
Tegea from Sparta see ibid. VII. 5, 6—9. 

10. ἄκριτος ἔρις kal ταραχή, Lopeless 
strife and confusion. ἄκριτος is not ad- 
mitting of settlement (κρίσι5). See Hellen. 


VII. 5, 27: ἀκρισία δὲ καὶ ταραχὴ ἔτι πλείων 


μετὰ τὴν μάχην (of Mantinea) ἐγένετο ἢ 
πρόσθεν ἐν τῇ  Ελλάδι. (Β].) 
$19. 2. προδόταις: for the names 


ΙΟ 


19 


22 AHMOZOENOY2 


5 9 > 4. 
εἶτ ἐν οἷς 
4 ,ὔ δ ᾿ς La) 5 fg 5 ἈΝ , 
ἡμάρτανον ἄλλοι καὶ κακῶς ἐφρόνουν, αὐτὸς παρεσκευάζετο 
\ 
5 καὶ κατὰ πάντων ἐφύετο. 


΄ \ δι ε \ aes 
TAVTAS συνέκρουε καὺυ 7POS AVTOVS εἐταραττεν" 


ε \ fp a ΄ * 
ὡς δὲ ταλαιπωρούμενοι τῷ μήκει 
ΜᾺ ΄, ε / \ A la) ᾽ 5 A“ la 
τοῦ πολέμου οἱ τότε μὲν βαρεῖς νῦν δ᾽ ἀτυχεῖς Θηβαῖοι 
φανεροὶ πᾶσιν ἦσαν ἀναγκασθησόμενοι καταφεύγειν ἐφ᾽ 
ε a ͵ὔ ν Ν A / \4 / ε 
ὑμᾶς, Φίλιππος, ἵνα μὴ τοῦτο γένοιτο μηδὲ συνέλθοιεν αἱ 

/ eon \ 5, ἢ 3 ,ὕ εἶ ΄ 3 ἥν. 
πόλεις, ὑμῖν μὲν εἰρήνην ἐκείνοις δὲ βοήθειαν ἐπηγγείλατο. 
i , 5 , 3 > ἃς N \ A 5.3 ; CoA 
oh. 50 τί οὖν συνηγωνίσατ᾽ αὐτῷ πρὸς τὸ λαβεῖν. ὀλίγου δεῖ ane 


ah 


| (dé ἑκόντας ἐξαπατωμένους; ἢ τῶν ἄλλων Ἑλλήνων, εἴτε χρὴ 


‘ 


| κακίαν εἴτ᾽ ἄγνοιαν εἴτε Kal ἀμφότερα ταῦτ᾽ εἰπεῖν, οἵ 
lal la \ lanl 

πόλεμον συνεχῆ καὶ μακρὸν πολεμούντων ὑμῶν, καὶ τοῦτον 
ε lal ἴω Ἂν » 

5 ὑπὲρ τῶν πᾶσι συμφερόντων, ὡς ἔργῳ φανερὸν γέγονεν, οὔτε. 


§19. 3. mdvra At, V6. αὑτοὺς =, L!; ἀλλήλους L?, Ar, V6; ἑαυτοὺς 
vulg. 4. ἄλλοι Σ (— above), L, Az; of ἄλλοι vulg. 6. νυνὶ δ᾽ Ar; νυνὶ 
V6. 8. Φίλιππος Σ᾽ (ὁ corr.), ὁ Φίλ. L, vulg. γένοιτο = (corr. ἢ), L, vulg. ; 
γένηται At, V6, B (ot 0 above) ; γένητο O. 9. ἡμῖν V6. 

8 20. 2. ἑκόντας ὑμᾶς Ar, V6: see VOmel’s note. 5. 


τῶν πᾶσι Σ, L}, A2; 
τῶν κοινῇ πᾶσι vulg. . 


-of some of these see § 48; a long black 
list is given in § 295: cf. XIX. 259, 
νόσημα δεινὸν ἐμπέπτωκεν eis τὴν ᾿Ελλάδα, 
κιτιλ. 

3. συνέκρονε, 


Demosthenes at the time of the peace; 
but times had changed. 

8 20. 1. ὀλίγου δεῖν, full form of 
ὀλίγου (M. T. 779), qualifies ἑκόντας 


brought into collision ἐξαπατ., almost willing dupes: cf. μικροῦ, 


~ 


(knocked together): cf. συνέκρουον, 163°, ὃ. 151°. 

and ξυγκρούειν, Thuc. I. 44.—év οἷς 2. ἡ.. Ἑλλήνων: the actual subject 
ἡμάρτανον ἄλλοι, 22 others’ blunders, appears in the alternative εἴτε... εἴτε. See 
cf. οἷς εὐτυχήκεσαν, § 18°. ἐν οἷς here § 270%, and XXIII. 156: 7 ὑμετέρα, ὦ dvd. 


is often taken as =éy οἷς χρόνοις, while; 
but cf. ἐν οἷς ἐπιστεύθητε in § 100%, ἐν οἷς 


εἰσηγγελλόμην in § 2501, ἐν οἷς ceuvi-— 


νομαι in ὃ 258%, ἐν οἷς ἔπταισεν in § 286°, 
ἐν οἷς εὐτύχησεν in ὃ 3235, ἐν αὐτοῖς οἷς 
χαρίζονται in ΙΧ. 63. 

5. κατὰ πάντων ἐφύετο, he was ογοτυ- 
ing above all their heads, i.e. so as to 
threaten them all.—t@ μήκει: cf. dexérns 
γεγονώς, Aesch, III. 148. 

6. βαρεῖς, overbearing, offensive.—vdv 
δ᾽ ἀτυχεῖς: after 335 B.c. See Schol., 
and notes on §§ 1893 and 35%. 

7. ἀναγκασθησόμενοι : in ov. 0b]. with 
the personal φανεροὶ ἦσαν (M. T. 907).— 
καταφεύγειν ἐφ᾽ ὑμᾶς: no such _ possi- 
bility is suggested by the language of 


᾽Αθ., εἴτε χρὴ φιλανθρωπίαν λέγειν εἴθ᾽ 
ὅ τι δήποτε. In Isocr. XV. 50 the original 
case is retained with εἴτε... εἴτε : περὶ τῆς 
ἐμῆς εἴτε βούλεσθε καλεῖν δυνάμεως εἴτε 
φιλοσοφίας, κ.τ.λ. 

3. κακίαν, daseness, here in the sense 
of worthlessness. Bl. cites for this milder 
sense δὲ 685, 2977; and for that of posi- 
tive wickedness (πονηρία) §§ 93°, 2797, 
3038, But in ὃ 297? κακία is applied to 
the whole list of traitors, though πονηρία 
is added as a stronger and more correct 
term. ® 

4. πόλεμον μακρὸν: the so-called 
Amphipolitan War with Philip (357— 
346 B.C.), which ended with the Sacred 
War. See Hist. § 3. 


ΠΕΡΙ TOY ZTEPANOY 


23 


, ¥ , ae tee 3 \ A wy 

χρήμασιν οὔτε σώμασιν οὔτ᾽ ἄλλῳ οὐδενὶ τῶν ἁπάντων : 
ip € on @ 

συνελάμβανον ὑμῖν: οἷς καὶ δικαίως Kal προσηκόντως ὀργι- 

ἢ μὲν οὖν τότε 


d ΄ ε ἴα ε ᾿ al , 
“ζόμενοι ἑτοίμως ὑπηκούσατε τῷ Φιλίππῳ. 
συγχωρηθεῖσα εἰρήνη διὰ ταῦτ᾽, οὐ dv ἐμὲ, ὡς οὗτος διέβαλ. 


td “ . 
Lev, ἐπράχθη" τὰ δὲ τούτων ἀδικήματα καὶ δωροδοκήματ᾽ ἐν το 
lou κι N - 
αὐτῇ TOV νυνὶ παρόντων πραγμάτων, av τις ἐξετάζῃ δικαίως, 
ene CF) & ¥ \ \ , ΡΝ Neen a > ΄, 3 
αἰτι΄ εὑρήσει. καὶ ταυτὶ πάνθ᾽ ὑπὲρ τῆς ἀληθείας ἀκριβολο- 21 


An \ > 
γοῦμαι καὶ διεξέρχομαι. εἰ yap εἶναί τι δοκοίη τὰ μάλιστ᾽ 
> Ψ ’ 
ἐν τούτοις ἀδίκημα, οὐδέν ἐστι δήπου πρὸς ἐμέ" ἀλλ᾽ ὁ μὲν 

φ- 3 Ἂς Ν \ ἰοὺ 
πρῶτος εἰπὼν καὶ μνησθεὶς ὑπὲρ τῆς εἰρήνης ᾿Αριστόδημος 
> ΚΑ ὁ Ν ε δ᾽ > ὃ ΄, \ / Fe Ν 
ἣν ὁ ὑποκριτὴς, ὁ δ᾽ ἐκδεξάμενος καὶ γράψας καὶ ἑαυτὸν ς 

\ 4 ω 
μετὰ τούτου μισθώσας ἐπὶ ταῦτα Φιλοκράτης ὁ ᾿Αγνούσιος, 
ὁ σὸ At , μων > i  ἷΝ᾽ 0. “Δ Ν ὃ a 
9 σὸς, Αἰσχίνη, κοινωνὸς, οὐχ ὁ ἐμὸς, οὐδ᾽ ἂν σὺ διαρραγῇς 


6. οὐδ᾽ ἄλλῳ Y, Φ. 
λαμβάνοντο = (yp), P. 


9. εἰρήνη τῷ Φιλίππῳ L?*. IO. 


12. alta L, vulg.; αἰτία Σ᾽; αἰτιαι Σ3. 

§21. 1. ταῦτα ΑΙ, V6. a, 3 
3. τούτων (for δήπου) Ar, V6. A 
2; περὶ (over ὑπὲρ) L? (yp). Ἐν 


μετὰ τούτου V6. 
ἐμὸς Σ, L; οὐκ ἐμὸς vulg. 


6. σώμασιν, Jives: cf. § 668. 

9. συγχωρηθεῖσα, conceded, acquiesced 

im: Athens showed no alacrity in making 
the peace, though she was deceived as to 
the main point.—8éBadAev, slanderously 
declared: see Aesch. 57 (end), 60. 
II. τῶν νυνὶ... εὑρήσει (sc. ris): the 
firm foothold in Greece which Philip 
secured by the peace, especially his in- 
fluence in the Amphictyonic Council, it 
is implied, made him at last the victor of 
Chaeronea. 

8 21. 1. ὑπὲρ τῆς ἀληθείας, from 
regard for (in the interest of) truth.— 
ἀκριβολογοῦμαι Kal διεξέρχομαι: see 
note on § 4°. 

2. τὰ μάλιστ᾽, ost clearly, with 
δοκοίη: cf. § 95°. 

3. οὐδέν.. πρὸς ἐμέ, 72 ἐς 710 concern of 
mine: cf. 88 447, 607. This may be an 
emphatic present apodosis, referring to 
the present condition implied in εἰ... δο- 
Koln, if 11 should appear that there is 


ἁπάντων Σ, L; πάντων vulg.; ὄντων V6. iE 
kal (after οἷς) om. O. 8. 
kal dwpod. om. ΟἹ. 


συνε- 
τῷ om. At, V6. 
11, ἐάν VO. 


τινα.. ἀδικήματα for τι... ἀδίκημα L*, vulg. 


περὶ (for ὑπὲρ) At, V6, F, Y; πε over ὑπὲρ 
ἐκδεξάμενος ( over δὴ L (yp). 
Αγνούσιος B; ᾿Αγνούσιος vulg.; αγνούσιος =. re 
οὐδ᾽ ἐὰν Φ. 


6. μισθώσας 
> 


(εἶναι) any fault; or it may be an em- 
phatic future expression, as in Pind. Isth. 
IV. (V.) 14, πάντ᾽ ἔχεις, εἴ σε τούτων μοῖρ᾽ 
ἐφίκοιτο καλῶν, you have the whole, should 
a share of these glories fall to you: so 
Pyth. 1. 81. 

4. ᾿Αριστόδημος: a tragic actor of 


good repute, one of the company in which * 


Aeschines once served (XIX. 246). For 
his informal mission to Philip in 348— 
347 B.C. see Grote XI. 517, 518, Schaefer 
11.192. See Hist. § 19. Aeschines (II. 
15, 16) calls this mission a πρεσβεία. 

5. ὁ ἐκδεξάμενος, A275 successor (he who 
took the business from him).—yparbas: 
sc. τὴν εἰρήνην: the peace was named 
from this motion of Philocrates. 

7. οὐδ᾽ ἂν σὺ Stappayys, 7:02 even if 
you split; cf. the common imprecation 
διαρραγείης (Ar. Av. 2). Aeschines is 
now as eager to repudiate Philocrates as 
he was in 345 B.C. to claim him as an 
associate: see note on § 17°. 


22 


24 AHMOZOENOYS 


’ ε Ν 7 ν , ν 9 \ 
ψευδόμενος, οἱ δὲ συνειπόντες ὅτου δήποτε ἕνεκα (ἐῶ γὰρ 
τοῦτό γ᾽ ἐν τῷ παρόντι) Εὔβουλος καὶ Κηφισοφῶν: ἐγὼ δ᾽ 

5 4 3 A 5 3 ν re , + \ eed 
οὐδὲν οὐδαμοῦ. GAN ὅμως, τούτων τοιούτων ὄντων καὶ ἐπ 
αὐτῆς τῆς ἀληθείας οὕτω δεικνυμένων, εἰς τοῦθ᾽ ἧκεν ἄναι- 
δείας ὥστ᾽ ἐτόλμα λέγειν ὡς ap ἐγὼ πρὸς τῷ τῆς εἰρήνης 
αἴτιος γεγενῆσθαι καὶ κεκωλυκὼς εἴην τὴν πόλιν μετὰ κοινοῦ 

΄ὕ a ε ΄ ΄, ΄ ; I δ. Va alge 
συνεδρίου τῶν Ἑλλήνων ταύτην ποιήσασθαι. εἶτ᾽ ὠ---τί ἂν 
εἰπών σέ τις ὀρθῶς προσείποι; ἔστιν Ὁ σὺ παρὼν 

Υ̓ A μ᾿ ’, cA if ἧς “-ς Ἔ las 
τηλικαύτην πρᾶξιν Kal συμμαχίαν ἡλίκην νυνὶ διεξῃεῖς ὁρῶν 
ἀφαιρούμενόν με τῆς πόλεως, ἠγανάκτησας, ἢ παρελθὼν 
lat a a κι 50. 5 χ Ν a Ν x > 
ταῦτα ἃ νῦν κατηγορεῖς ἐδίδαξας καὶ διεξῆλθες; Kal μὴν εἰ 
τὸ κωλῦσαι Τὴν τῶν Ἑλλήνων κοινωνίαν ἐπεπράκειν ἐγὼ 


8 22. 5. 
τολμᾷ vulg: 4 
L; αὐτὴν vulg. vs 


L; viv vulg. 
above) 2; xai L, Ar, V63 ἢ vulg. 
§ 28. 1,2. εἰ τὸ = (no Tw visible). 


8. ὅτου δήποτε ἕνεκα, for whatever 
reason (tt may have been): δήποτε, like 
οὖν, makes ὅστις indefinite. This is as 
strong language as Demosthenes wishes to 
use of Eubulus, the conservative states- 
man, universally respected, and perfectly 
honest, but a strong advocate of ‘‘peace 
at any price.” For Eubulus see Grote 
XI. 386, 387; Schaefer 1. 186—188. Of 
Cephisophon’s connection with the peace 
nothing further is known: he is probably 
the Paeanian mentioned in § 75, in XIX. 
293, and in Aesch. 11. 73. Droysen, 
Vomel, Westermann, and others think 
Κτησιφῶν should be read here: cf. XIx. 
12, 18, 97, 315- 

το. οὐδαμοῦ: cf. ὃ 15°, and ἔστιν ὅπου ; 


§ 228. Demosth. is fully justified in this 
strong denial. 
§ 22. 1,2. ὄντων, δεικνυμένων : ad- 


versative (M. T. 842). 

4. γεγενῆσθαι, κεκωλυκὼς εἴην: for 
the perfects see M.T. 103, 109. The 
whole sentence (3—5) ws dp’...mowjoa- 


_g@a: refers to the elaborate charge of 


Aeschines (58—64), that Demosthenes 


wore ἐτόλμα At; ὥστε τολμᾶν V6; ὡστεετολμᾶ (2nd ε erased) 2; wore 
ἔτι kai vulg.; ἔτι om. 2, L}, Ar, V6, F, ®. rt 
νυνὶ &, L; νῦν L (yp), vulg. 
decs kal διεξ. L (yp), vulg.; διετραγ. καὶ διεξ. B, Y. 9. 
κατηγορεῖς 2, vulg.; κατηγόρεις Vom., West., Bl. 


ταύτην Σ, 
διεξήεις Σ,1,, Α2 ; ἐτραγῴ- 
νυν =! (corr. νυνὶ); νυνὶ 
καὶ (ἢ 


2. ἔγωγε ΑΙ. 


pressed the negotiations for peace with 
indecent haste and thereby excluded other 
Greek states from the benefits of the 
treaty. The answer in § 23 is perfectly 
satisfactory. (See Hist. §§ 21, 32.) 

5. συνεδρίου: a special meeting of 
delegates summoned by Athens from vari- 
ous Greek states, which never met; not 
the regular synod of the allies of Athens, 
which was in session when the peace was 
made (Aesch. III. 69, 70).—#, τί dv... 
προσείποι; ἀποσιώπησις and διαπόρησις 
combined (Bl.): for the regular position 
of av before εἰπών, see M. T. 224. Cf. 
ὦ τί σ᾽ εἴπω; Ar. Nub. 1378. 

6. ἔστιν ὅπου : temporal, like οὐδαμοῦ 
in §§ 15° and μιῖῦ.---παρὼν belongs to 
ὁρῶν... ἠγανάκτησας, ἢ...διεξῆλθες; (as a 
whole): the meaning is, were you ever 
present when you saw me, etc.? 

7. πράξιν kal συμμαχίαν : the general 
before the particular. In § 1918 the order 
is reversed. 

§ 23. 2. ἐπεπράκειν: even the best 
Mss. of Demosth. give this form of the 
plupf., while those of Plato generally 


| 

| 
| 
| 


TEP] TOY ZTE®ANOY 


25 


Φιλίππῳ, σοὶ τὸ μὴ σιγῆσαι λοιπὸν Hv, ἀλλὰ βοᾶν καὶ 
διαμαρτύρεσθαι καὶ δηλοῦν τουτοισί. οὐ τοίνυν ἐποίησας 


οὔτε γὰρ ἦν πρεσβεία πρὸς οὐδέν᾽ ἀπεσταλμένη τότε τῶν 
Ἑλλήνων, ἀλλὰ πάλαι πάντες ἦσαν ἐξεληλεγμένοι, οὐθ᾽ 
᾿ biros ὑγιὲς περὶ τούτων εἴρηκεν οὐδέν. χωρὶς δὲ τούτων 
καὶ διαβάλλει τὴν πόλιν τὰ μέγιστα ἐν οἷς ψεύδεται" εἰ γὰρ 
ὑμεῖς ἅμα τοὺς μὲν Ἕλληνας εἰς πόλεμον παρεκαλεῖτε, αὐτοὶ 
δὲ πρὸς Φίλιππον περὶ τῆς εἰρήνης πρέσβεις ἐπέμπετε, 
Εὐρυβάτου πρᾶγμα, οὐ πόλεως ἔργον οὐδὲ χρηστῶν avOpa- 


to the loud voice of Aesch., 


tion,” 


᾿ no embassy then out on tts mission. 


πων διεπράττεσθε. 


4- διαμαρτύρασθαι At ; -εσθαι (a overe) L. 5. 


εἰκότως. At, V6; εἰκότως. om. &, vulg. 


Cob., Dind. ἢ: 
$24. 2. 
εἰρήνης 2; εἰρήνης L, vuly. 6. - 


have the older Attic form in -ἢ (for -ea), 
as ἑωράκη in Rep. 336D. 

3. TO μὴ σιγῆσαι: West. says that 
this argument recurs in various forms 
72 times, citing §§ 13, 117, 124, 188 ff., 
196, 222, 239, 243, 273-—@ol λοιπὸν ἦν, 
wt remained for you, after εἰ ἐπεπράκειν, 
supposing that I had sold (a simple suppo- 
sition). If εἰ ἐπεπρ. were made an un- 
real condition (on the ground of ov... 
τοῦτο in 4, 5), λοιπὸν ἣν would be classed 
with ἔδει, δίκαιον ἦν, etc. (M. T. 416), 
and imply you ought to have kept silence. 
But see note on § 63!.—Boav might refer 
like πεφω- 
νασκηκώς, ὃ 308°; but ΜΔ uses it 
also of himself (§ 143°), and it is probably 
no more than our cry out. 

6. οὔτε ἦν ... ἀπεσταλμένη τότε: 
Holmes calls this an “audacious asser- 
It must be remembered that ἦν 
ἀπεσταλμένη is not an ordinary plupf. like 
ἀπέσταλτο (M. T. 45), which would have 
meant that no embassy had ever been sent: 
‘the compound form means that ¢here was 
The 
embassies were probably informal in 
most cases, and no definite report was 


5 > 5 »᾿ ~ > » '' Ἀ 
ἀλλ΄ οὐκ ἐστι ταῦτα, οὐκ ἐστι' TL γὰρ 


μηδαμοῦ A2. οὐδείς" 
6. οὐδένα =, L, vulg.; οὐδένας ΟἹ, νό, 


τότε (for πάλαι) Β (πάλαι mg.) ; τότε χάλαι 137, 


τοὺς μὲν ἄλλους Ελλ. L, vulg.; ἄλλους om. Σ, Ar. 2, VO. re 
διεπράττεσθε (Ge corr. from θαι) 2. 


THS 


expected from them in case of failure. 
(See Hist. § 32.) The next sentence 
tells the whole truth, πάλαι... ἐξεληλεγμέ- 
vo, 1.6. all had long before this been 
thoroughly canvassed (and found wanting). 
Cf. 20°77, οὔτε.. ὑμῖν. Even Aeschines 
(II. 79) took the same view fourteen 
years earlier: οὐδενὸς δ᾽ ἀνθρώπων ém- 
κουροῦντος τῇ πόλει, ἀλλὰ τῶν μὲν περι- 
ορώντων ὅ τι συμβήσεται, τῶν δὲ συνεπι- 
στρατευόντων. 

§ 24. 2. ἐν οἷς ψεύδεται: οἵ. § τοῦ. 
The argument of 2—6 is that the nego- 
tiations for peace show that Athens could 
not have been expecting such envoys at 
this time. 

5.  HvpuvBdarov πρᾶγμα: Eurybatus 
was a proverbial scoundrel, said to have 
been an Ephesian who was hired by 
Croesus to raise an army and gave the 
money to Cyrus. See Harpocr. under 
Εὐρύβατον ; Aesch. III. 137; and Paroem. 
Gr., Diogen. IV. 76, under evpuBarever Oar, 
with note.—7réAews ἔργον, an act fit for a 
state, 

6. οὐκ ἔστι... ἔστι : see the same repe- 
tition before the oath in ἃ 208}, 


233 οὐδαμοῦ τοῦτο, οὐδ᾽ ἤκουσέ σου ταύτην τὴν φωνὴν οὐδείς" 5 


24 


: 26 ΔΗΛΛΟΣΘΕΝΟῪΣ 


| \ / 7, > ὡς 5 \ 3 / ~ “A 
| καὶ βουλόμενοι μετεπέμπεσθ᾽ ἂν αὐτοὺς ἐν τούτῳ τῷ καιρῷ; 
' 5 αἱ ὰ \ Sad ἐν > 3° Sere Ψ 3 αι να Ν 
| ἐπὶ τὴν εἰρήνην; ἀλλ ὑπῆρχεν ἀπασιν. add ἐπὶ TOV 
i , 3 3 3 \ \ ead > ΄ 
πόλεμον; ἀλλ᾽ αὐτοὶ περὶ εἰρήνης ἐβουλεύεσθε. 
» lanl > 5 χὰ 5 , e Ν ψφξὺ9 »» “ἡ 5 Ν Fee 
το οὔτε τῆς ἐξ ἀρχῆς εἰρήνης ἡγεμὼν οὐδ᾽ αἴτιος ὧν ἐγὼ φαίνο- 
» ~ Py - , ,ὕ 50 Χ 3 \ N 
μαι, οὔτε τῶν ἄλλων ὧν κατεψεύσατό μου οὐδὲν ἀληθὲς ὃν 
δείκνυται. 
25 Ἐπειδὴ τοίνυν ἐποιήσατο τὴν εἰρήνην ἡ πόλις, ἐνταῦθα 
πάλιν σκέψασθε τί ἡμῶν ἑκάτερος προείλετο πράττειν" καὶ 
γὰρ ἐκ τούτων εἴσεσθε τίς ἣν ὁ Φιλίππῳ πάντα συναγωνιζό- 


5 φέρον ζητῶν. 

\ , \ , ἄν, τῆς Ν ,ὕ 3 a xR ae 
τὴν ταχίστην τοὺς πρέσβεις ἐπὶ τοὺς τόπους ἐν οἷς ἂν ὄντα 
Φίλιππον πυνθάνωνται, καὶ τοὺς ὅρκους ἀπολαμβάνειν" οὗτοι 
26 δὲ οὐδὲ γράψαντος ἐμοῦ ταῦτα ποιεῖν ἠθέλησαν. τί δὲ τοῦτ᾽ 
ἠδύνατο, ὦ ἄνδρες ᾿Αθηναῖοι; ἐγὼ διδάξω. Φιλίππῳ μὲν 


Ἐν 2 , ε “ Ν ‘\ er / A 
ἣν συμφέρον ws πλεῖστον τὸν μεταξὺ χρόνον γενέσθαι τῶν 
9. οὔκουν Σ, Y, V6; οὐκοῦν L, vulg. 11. οὐδὲν before wy Ol. 
12. φαίνεται VO. 
8 25. 2. σκέψασθαι Σ. ἕκαστος V6. 3. ὄψεσθε τίς Ar, V6. 
πάντα συναγωνιζ. = (yp), L?, vulg.; Bir. τε τὴν εἰρήνην συναγ. D1, 1.1; Pir. τὴν εἰρ. 


μου om. Y. 


dywut. A2. 4. 700m. ΟἿ ἐπὶ τοὺς τόπους L, vulg.; om. =! (in mg. 
with */.); ἐπὶ rots τόποις Ar, V6. 7. τὸν Bir. Ar. 2, V6. πυνθάνονται V6. 
ὅρκους τὴν ταχίστην L?, Ar, V6. 8. οὐδὲ vulg.; ὀυ Σ᾽ (dé above). 

§ 26. 2. ἐδύνατο A2. ὦ om. B, ®, O, V6. 3: 


7. μετεπέμπεσθ᾽ dy, would you have -- ἀποπλεῖν, with ἔγραψα, proposed. The 


οὐκοῦν. 


μενος, καὶ τίς ὁ πράττων ὑπὲρ ὑμῶν καὶ τὸ τῇ πόλει συμ- 
3 Ν Ν ie » if 3 -~ " 
ἐγὼ μὲν τοίνυν ἔγραψα βουλεύων ἀποπλεῖν 


= ἃ Ὁ... ee Oe CO 
. 


been sending? 

8. ὑπῆρχεν ἅπασιν, i.e. peace was 
open to them all: see note on § 1°. 

10. τῆς ἐξ ἀρχῆς εἰρήνης, ie. the 
earlier stages of the peace. But τὴν προ- 
τέραν εἰρήνην in Aesch. Ill. 58 is the 
Peace of Philocrates, opposed to that of 
Demades (338 B.C.). 

8 25. 1. ἐπειδὴ: see note on § 42%, 
--ἐνταῦθα, here (temporal): cf. οὐδαμοῦ, 
§ 15°. 

2. τί προείλετο πράττειν; what was 
his προαίρεσις ( purpose or policy) ? 

5. βουλεύων : Demosth. was one of the 
Senate of 500 in 347—346 B.C., and he 
presided, as ἐπιστάτης τῶν προέδρων, in 
the Assembly of the 25th of Elaphebolion 
(Aesch. III. 62, 73—74). See Hist. § 38. 


bill was passed on the third of Munychi- . 


on (April 29) : see Aesch. II. 92, and Hist. 
§ 39. No concurrent vote of the As- 
sembly was needed here, τὴν βουλὴν 
ποιήσαντος Tov δήμου κυρίαν, XIX. 154. 

6. ἐν οἷς ἂν πυνθάνωνται (Μ΄. T. 6941): 
cf. 88 26°, 279, 205; ἘΠ ἷ 

7. τοὺς ὅρκους ἀπολαμβάνειν, Zo ad- 


minister the oaths (i.e. to recetve them): — 


ὅρκους ἀποδιδόναι ts to take the oaths (i.e. 
to give them). See § 26°, and ΣΙΝ. 318. 


8. οὐδὲ γράψαντος, ot even after 7 


had proposed the bill (its passage is 
implied). 

§26. I. 
(5—8) signify? Cf. VIII. 57, XXI. 31. 


3. τὸν μεταξὺ χρόνον τῶν ὅρκων, Zhe ἴ 


intervening time (after making the peace) 


Dir. “ὦ 


TOV om. Fs Φ, ¥.. 4 


vl... ἠδύνατο; what did this — 


6. ee 


ΠΕΡΙ TOY ΣΤΕΦΑΝΟΥ 27 


4 Sy ~ ae ᾿ Γι Ν / 4 ε ~ \ 5 4 3 

| ὅρκων, ὑμῖν δ᾽ ὡς ἐλάχιστον. διὰ τί; ὅτι ὑμεῖς μὲν οὐκ ἀφ 
‘> 3 4 δ ξ ΄, ΄, 3 9 Ὁ Ὁ 3 ΄, Ν I ee 

34 ἧς ὠμόσαθ᾽ ἡμέρας μόνον, ἀλλ᾽ ad ns ἠἡλπίσατε THY εἰρήνην 5 

| ἔσέσθαι, πάσας ἐξελύσατε τὰς παρασκευὰς τὰς τοῦ πολέμου" 


᾿ς \ ets \ A , ΄, οὐ), Fo 4 , 
ὁ δὲ TOUT ἐκ παντὸς TOV χρόνου μάλιστ᾽ ETpaypyaTEveEToO, 
, ν > > AN Y A , , Ν σι 
νομίζων, ὅπερ ἦν ἀληθὲς, ὅσα τῆς πόλεως προλάβοι πρὸ τοῦ 
Ν YY | la) , a“ / ΄ 5 , 
τοὺς OPKOUS ἀποδοῦναι, πάντα ταῦτα βεβαίως ἕξειν: οὐδένα 
Ν ΝΣ τὰ ἡ , ΄, Y δ᾽ τὰς ΄ 
γὰρ γὴν εἰρήνην λύσειν τούτων ἕνεκα. αγὼ προορώμενος, 27 
»» ψ' 3 ἴω Ν / Ν , ‘a / 
avop ς ᾿Αθηναῖοι, καὶ λογιζόμενος τὸ ψήφισμα τοῦτο γράφω, 
πλεῖν ἐπὶ τοὺς τόπους ἐν οἷς ἂν ἢ Φίλιππος καὶ τοὺς ὅρκους 
τὴν ταχίστην ἀπολαμβάνειν, ἵν᾽ ἐχόντων τῶν Θρᾳκῶν, τῶν 
ὑμετέρων συμμάχων, ταῦτα τὰ χωρία ἃ νῦν οὗτος διέσυρε, 5 


εἶ ’ Ἀ Ν 
τὸ Σέρριον καὶ τὸ 


N \ \ > / ν 
THVOV καὶ τὴν Ἐργισκὴν, οὕτω 


5. ἡμέρας μόνον Σ, L, Ar. 2; μόνον ju. B, vulg. τὴν οἴη. Β, Φ, Y. 6. ἐξελύ- 


care Σ, L, vulg.; ἐξελύσασθε Β. 
πολέμου 1... 7. τοῦτον (ν erased) >. 


8 27. 2. «ὦ ἄνδρες vulg.; ὦ om. 2, L, Y, O. 


τέρων At. 
(yp), vulg. ; Σέρρειον L}, Y. 


τὰς (bef. τοῦ) om. V6. 


ταῦτα Ta χωρία Σ, L; τὰ χωρ. ταῦθ᾽ vulg. 
Μυρτηνὸν Ar; Μυρτηνον (Γι over τὴ 2; Μύρτινον 


ἐξελύσατε τὰς τοῦ 
“nw / / t 7 

9. ταῦτα πάντα At. Io. ἕνεκεν ΑΙ. 

τοῦτο τὸ ψήφισμα Al. 5. ἡἦμε- 

Σέρριον Σ, L? 


V6; Μύρτιν (τιον over tw) 1,: Μυρτην 1, (yp); Μύρτυον Ο ; Μύρτιον vulg. 


before he (Philip) should take the oath. 
ὅρκων refers to Philip’s oath, not to the 
oaths of the two parties. See Shilleto’s 
note on XIX. 164 (p. 393 R.), τὸ ws πλεῖ- 
στον Tov μεταξὺ χρόνον διατριφθῆναι mpd 
τοῦ τοὺς ὅρκους ἀπολαβεῖν (Φιλ.) : he quotes 
Ar. Av. 187 ἐν μέσῳ ἀήρ ἐστι γῆς, between 
earth (and heaven); Ach. 433, κεῖται 
δ᾽ ἄνωθεν τῶν Θυεστείων ῥακῶν, μεταξὺ 
τῶν Ἰνοῦς, i.e. between these rags and 
those of Ino; Thue. 111. 51 és τὸ μεταξὺ 
τῆς νήσου, into the passage between the 
island (and the mainland). | 

6. ἐξελύσατε, you broke off (stopped): 
the active, though somewhat less expres- 
sive than the middle, conveys the whole 
_ idea, and has the best Ms. authority. 

ἡ. τοῦτ᾽, his own plan, to prolong the 
time when Athens must be quiet while he 
could act, referring to 3, 4.—ék παντὸς 
τοῦ χρόνου, i.e. from Philip’s first sug- 
gestions of peace (see § 21°). 

8. ὅσα προλάβοι, αὐ that he might 
secure from the city: we might have ὅσ᾽ 
ἂν προλάβῃ in the same sense (cf. § 25°). 


9. οὐδένα... λύσειν continues the or 
obl. from ἕξειν. Even an optative is 
sometimes thus continued, as in I. 22, 
δέοε διοικεῖν (M. T. 675). 

ὃ 27. 2. ψήφισμα γράφω πλεῖν: 
cf: eos ἀποπλεῖν (ὃ 255).---τοῦτο, i.e. 
the tlecree just mentioned. 

ἘΝ ᾿διέσυρε, ridiculed \(tore in pieces), 
refers fo Aesch. 1Π. 82, where he charges 
Demosth. with making trouble, after the 
peace was concluded, by mentioning all 
the insignificant places captured by Philip: 
οὗτός ἐστιν ὁ πρῶτος ἐξευρὼν Σέρριον τεῖχος 
καὶ Δορίσκον καὶ ᾿Εργίσκην καὶ Μυρτίσκην 
καὶ Τάνος καὶ Τανιάδα, χωρία ὧν οὐδὲ 
τὰ ὀνόματα ἤδεμεν πρότερον. Herodotus 
mentions Doriscus seven times ; Demosth. 
(VIII. 64, IX. 15) mentions Doriscus and 
Serrion as captured by Philip in time of 
peace. Μυρτίσκη (or Μυργίσκη) is pro- 
bably Μυρτηνός jocosely assimilated to 
"Epyicxn. See Hist. 8 39. 

6. οὕτω, under these circumstances 
(hardly translatable), sums up the pre- 
ceding ἐχόντων... Ἐργίσκην. 


28 AHMOZOENOY> 


/ > ce Ἀ % Ἢ > ἊΣ Ν 3 , — 
γίγνοινθ᾽ ot ὅρκοι, καὶ μὴ προλαβὼν ἐκεῖνος TOUS ἐπικαίρους 
la an / \ Bs \ 
TOV τόπων κύριος τῆς Θράκης κατασταίη, μηδὲ πολλῶν μὲν 


χρημάτων πολλῶν δὲ στρατιωτῶν me 


28 ῥᾳδίως τοῖς λοιποῖς ἐπιχειροίη πράγμασιν. 


ἴσας ἐκ τούτων 
> la) Ν 
εἶτα τοῦτο μὲν 


ιν 
οὐχὶ λέγει τὸ ψήφισμα οὐδ᾽ ἀναγιγνώσκει:" εἰ δὲ βουλεύων 
Β΄. «ἢ / \ / » aA Pa ὃ aN 
ἐγὼ προσάγειν τοὺς πρέσβεις ῴμην δεῖν, τοῦτό μου διαβάλ.- 


λει. ἀλλὰ τί ἐχρῆν με ποιεῖν; μὴ προσάγειν γράψαι τοὺς 


3. ΩΝ ἴω > ν Ψ.9 ε la A x lA x 
ἐπὶ τοῦθ᾽ ἥκοντας, ἵν᾿ ὑμῖν διαλεχθῶσιν; ἢ θέαν μὴ κατα- 


γίγνοινθ᾽ (2nd ν, end of line, later ?) =. 9. 


¥. 
§ 28. 3. ᾧμην προσάγειν V6, 


εὐπορίσας V6. 


7. ἐπικαίρους, seasonable, here ad- 
vantageous for attacking the Athenian 
possessions, especially the Chersonese. 

8. κατασταίη and ἐπιχειροίη (το) 
continue the final clause with iva (4).— 
πολλῶν χρημάτων: from the rich Thra- 
cian gold mines. Dissen refers to Diod. 
XVI. 8, where it is said that Philip had a 
revenue of a thousand talents (£200,000) 
from his mines at Crenides (Philippi). 

Io. τοῖς λοιποῖς (cf. § 95!°), what 
remained to be done. 

ὃ 28. 2. λέγει-- ἀναγιγνώσκει, 7e- 
cites—has it read (by the clerk). λέγε, 
properly recite, repeat, is the term most 
commonly used for ead in addressing the 
clerk. In ὃ 305 we have λέγε καὶ ava- 
γνωθι λαβών, probably in the same sense 
as the same verbs here. We find λέγε 
λαβών, ἀνάγνωθι λαβών, λαβέ, λαβὲ καὶ 
λέγε, φέρε καὶ λέγε, and δός used in the 
same way. 

3. προσάγειν τοὺς πρέσβεις (sc. εἰς 
τὴν ἐκκλησίαν) : these were the ambassa- 
dors sent by Philip to negotiate the peace. 
Foreign embassies first presented them- 
selves to the Senate, which by a decree 
provided for their introduction to the 
Assembly: see Aesch. 11. 58, ταῖς δὲ 
tevixats πρεσβείαις ἡ βουλὴ Tas els τὸν 
δῆμον προσόδους προβουλεύει. See C. I. 
Att. 11. No. 51, ll. 12—15: προσαγαγεῖν 


δὲ τοὺς πρέσβεις εἰς τὸν δῆμον εἰς THY πρώ-. 


τὴν ἐκκλησίαν, of an embassy from the 
tyrant Dionysius (369—368 B.c.). Sucha 


. προβούλευμα was proposed by Demosth. 


in the Senate before the arrival of the 
ambassadors, appointing a special meeting 
of the Assembly to receive them on the 
eighth of Elaphebolion: afterwards the 
discussion of the peace was postponed 
to the eighteenth and nineteenth. (See 
Hermann, Staatsalt. § 85°; Headlam, 
Election by Lot, 66--68.)---τοῦτό pov: 
μου is possessive. West. quotes ὃν σύ 
μου διέσυρες, § 2997, and ταύτην διαβεβλή- 
κασί μου, 1.011. 30; and Bl. πολλὰ 'Ομήρου 
ἐπαινοῦντες, Plat. Rep. 383 A. 

5. θέαν... κελεῦσαι; (sc. ἐχρῆν) ought 
7 not to have ordered the architect (of the 


theatre) zo assign them seats (as I did)? — 


θέαν, place to see; cf. ἐθεώρουν (7): this 


would be the προεδρία (Aesch. Ill. 76). — 


The stone Dionysiac theatre was at this 


time building under the direction of — 


Lycurgus; and the lessee was called 


ἀρχιτέκτων, as an important part of his — 
duties was the superintendence of the 


work of building. This name still re- 
mained in use in much later times. See 
C. I. Att. 11. No. 164 (probably about 
325 B.C.), in which the ἀρχιτέκτων is 
directed to provide seats for some public 
guests. A much later inscription, No. 
335, in honour of certain σιτῶναι, pro- 
vides εἶναι αὐτοῖς προεδρίαν ἐμ πᾶσι τοῖς 


ἀγῶσι...καὶ τὸν ἀρχιτέκτονα τὸν ἀεὶ καθι- — 


/ : > Ὁ 4 
στάμενον Karavéuew αὐτοῖς τὴν θέαν. 


Other names of the lessee of the theatre 


were θεατροπώλης and θεατρώνης. See 
Boeckh, Staatsh. d. Athener I. 278. See 
Dorpfeld and Reisch, Griech. Theater, 


—=< 2. T= 


Ar; μὲν A2; om. V6. 
vulg.—— 10. 


παρέβη.) vulg. 


-36—40, where the building of the theatre 
is assigned to about 350—325 B.c. It 
appears that a part of the stone seats were 
in place in 340. Aeschines (61, 76) 
makes this official politeness of Demo- 
sthenes one ground of his grotesque charge 
of flattering Philip! To this Demosth. 
alludes in ὃ 294”, ὃς γὰρ ἐμοὶ Φιλιππισμὸν, 
κιτιλ. Aesch., however, mentions only 
the introduction to the theatre. 

6. ἐν τοῖν δυοῖν ὀβολοῖν, 771 the two- 
obol seats, the three-penny seats of the 
ordinary citizens. The διωβελία, which 
was then given from the theoric fund as 
festival money to every citizen who asked 
for it, paid the entrance fee to the theatre. 
It is implied that the distinguished 
strangers could have been admitted, like 
other people, to the common seats by 
merely paying their two obols. With ἐν 
τοῖν δυοῖν ὀβολοῖν cf. ἐν rots ἰχθύσιν, Ar. 


ὀβολοῖν ἐθεώρουν ἂν, εἰ μὴ τοῦτ᾽ ἐγράφη. 


τουτὶ λαβὼν, ὃ σαφῶς οὗτος εἰδὼς παρέβη. 


7. μικρὰ L?, vulg., om. 213 σμικρὰ Σ35 (above line), 1.1, Az. 8. 


ΠΕΡΙ TOY ΣΤΕΦΑΝΟῪ 29 


a \ 9 ,ὕ A 9 ΩΝ κα 9 5. 9 A A 
νεῖμαι TOV ἀρχιτέκτονα αὕτοις κελεῦσαι; ἀλλ᾽ ἐν τοῖν δυοῖν 


τὰ μικρὰ συμ- 


φέροντα τῆς πόλεως ἔδει με φυλάττειν, τὰ δ᾽ ὅλα, ὥσπερ 
οὗτοι, πεπρακέναι; οὐ δήπου. 


λέγε τοίνυν μοι τὸ ψήφισμα 


ne 


ΨΗΦΙΣΜΑ AHMOSOENOTS. 


[Emi ἄρχοντος Μνησιφίλου, ἑκατομβαιῶνος ἕνῃ καὶ νέᾳ, 
φυλῆς πρυτανευούσης [Ι]ανδιονίδος, Δημοσθένης Δημοσθένους 
Παιανιεὺς εἶπεν, ἐπειδὴ Φίλιππος ἀποστείλας πρέσβεις περὶ τῆς 
εἰρήνης ὁμολογουμένας πεποίηται συνθήκας, δεδόχθαι τῇ βουλῇ 5 
καὶ τῷ δήμῳ τῷ ᾿Αθηναίων, ὅπως ἂν ἡ εἰρήνη ἐπιτελεσθῇ ἡ ἐπι- 
χειροτονηθεῖσα ἐν τῇ πρώτῃ ἐκκλησίᾳ, πρέσβεις ἑλέσθαι ἐκ 
πάντων ᾿Αθηναίων ἤδη πέντε, τοὺς δὲ χειροτονηθέντας ἀποδημεῖν 
μηδεμίαν ὑπερβολὴν ποιουμένους, ὅπου ἂν ὄντα πυνθάνωνται τὸν 
Φίλιππον, καὶ τοὺς ὅρκους λαβεῖν τε παρ᾽ αὐτοῦ καὶ δοῦναι τὴν 
ταχίστην ἐπὶ ταῖς ὡμολογημέναις συνθήκαις αὐτῷ πρὸς τὸν 
᾿Αθηναίων δῆμον, συμπεριλαμβάνοντας καὶ τοὺς ἑκατέρων συμ- 


μὴ (for με 


πεπρακέναι Σ,1,, A2, Φ, Y, Β; πεπρ. Φιλίππῳ ΑΙ, 
εἰδὼς οὗτος Ar; εἰδὼς Σ΄“ (partly erased), om. >}. 


λέγε (after 


Vesp. 789 (see Ran. 1068), zz the fish- 
market, ἐν τῷ μύρῳ, Eq. 1375. 

7. τὰ μικρὰ συμφέροντα: it is jo- 
cosely assumed that Aesch. objected to 
the higher price which the state probably 
paid to the lessee for the front seats, or 
perhaps to the state paying at all for the 
seats of the ambassadors. 

8,9. τῆς πόλεως : cf. τῇ πόλει, 88 301, 
and 226.---ἠφυλάττειν, πεπρακέναι: the 
change of tense may perhaps be seen in 
a paraphrase; was zt my duty to watch 
the petty interests of the state, after 7 had 
sold her highest interests like these men? 
With ὅλα, whole, entire, cf. τῶν ὅλων τι, 
§ 2787, 

§ 29. This decree is a good specimen 
of ignorant forgery. The Archon’s name 
and the date are both wrong; it is called 
a decree of the Senate and the People, 
when it was passed by the Senate alone; 


30 


30 AHMOZSOENOY= 


μάχους. 


πρέσβεις ἡρέθησαν Εὔβουλος ᾿Αναφλύστιος, Αἰσχίνης 


Κοθωκίδης, Κηφισοφῶν ἹΡαμνούσιος, Δημοκράτης Φλυεὺς, Κλέων 


15 Κοθωκίδης. 


τς A \ A , fn 
Tatra γράψαντος ἐμοῦ τότε Kal TO TH πόλει συμφέρον 


οὐ τὸ Φιλίππῳ ζητοῦντος, βραχὺ φροντίσαντες οἱ ΄Χρηστοὶ 
πρέσβεις οὗτοι καθῆντ' ἐν Μακεδονίᾳ τρεῖς ὅλους μῆνας, ἕως 
ἦλθε Φίλιππος ἐκ Θρᾷκης πάντα καταστρεψάμενος, ἐξὸν 
5 ἡμερῶν δέκα, ὁμοίως δὲ τριῶν ἢ τεττάρων, εἰς τὸν ᾿Ελλήσπον- 
τον ἀφῖχθαι καὶ τὰ χωρία σῶσαι, λαβόντας τοὺς ὅρκους 
πρὶν ἐκεῖνον ἐξελεῖν αὐτά: οὐ γὰρ ἂν ἡψατ᾽ αὐτῶν παρόντων 
ἡμῶν, ἢ οὐκ ἂν ὡρκίζομεν αὐτὸν, ὥστε τῆς εἰρήνης ἂν 
διημαρτήκει καὶ οὐκ ἂν ἀμφότερ᾽ εἶχε, καὶ τὴν εἰρήνην 


10 Καὶ τὰ χωρία. 

ἣν Ν ’ > (ας 
31 To μὲν τοινυν ἐν τῇ 
Φιλίππου δωροδόκημα δὲ 


8 80. I. τὸ τῆς πόλεως Ο. 2. 
AL; οὐ τῷ Φιλίππῳ wales: Ai 
ἐκεῖ καταστρ. =’, Le Ar. Le 
wy. ἐξελεῖν αὐτόν V6. 3, ὑμῶν D; 
corr. from o) 2. 
§ S31. 2. ἀνθρώπων D, L}, Ar. 


ἐχθρῶν vulg.; om. Hermog. 


it provides for the appointment of five 
envoys when there were ten, and these 
had been appointed long before; it pro- 
vides for the oaths to be taken by Athens 
and her allies, when these had already 
been taken; and most of the five names 
of the envoys are wrong. 

8 80. τὸ τῇ πόλει συμφέρον : cf. 287, 
where τὰ συμφέροντα is a pure substan- 
tive. 

3. τρεῖς ὅλους μῆνας: “‘sat still in 
Macedonia three whole months” 
course a rhetorical exaggeration, which is 
corrected by Demosth. himself. In ΧΙΧ. 
57 he says ἀπεδημήσαμεν τρεῖς μῆνας 
ὅλους (cf. 158), somewhat less incorrectly; 
but in 58—6o he gives the exact dates, 
by which we see that the embassy was 
absent from Athens only about ten weeks. 
See Hist. §§ 40, 43. 

4. πάντα καταστρεψάμενος: see § 27. 


2; [ἀνθρώπων] Bl. 


is of 


, “ - Ν 
πρεσβείᾳ πρῶτον κλέμμα μὲν 
τῶν ἀδίκων τούτων ἀνθρώπων 


οὐ τὸ Φιλίππῳ Σ, L, Β, F ; οὐ τὸ τοῦ Φιλίππου 
καταστρεψάμενος Σ᾿; καταστρ. τἀκεῖ vulg. ; τὰ 
ὁμοίως = Σ,1., Ar. 23 μᾶλλον & (vp, late), Li 

ἡμῶν vulg. ; L has both. 


ὠὡρκιζωμεν (ond ὦ ω 


ἀνθρώπων καὶ θεοῖς 


-Οὀξὸν.. ἀφῖχθαι... σῶσαι : ἐξόν represents 
ἐξῆν, and ἀφῖχθαι is a proper perfect (M. 
T. 109); 
(already) arrived and to save the towns, 
i.e. we might have done both of these. 

5. ὁμοίως, guzte as well (as in ten 
days): the common reading μᾶλλον would 
mean rather. 

7. παρόντων-:-Ξ- εἰ παρῆμεν, if we had 
been there. For the various past tenses 
with ἄν, all of which are in 7—9, see 
M. T. 413: thus τῆς elp. ἂν διημαρτήκει 
is he would have failed to secure the peace 
(which he had already secured by our 
absence), and οὐκ ἂν ἀμφότερ᾽ εἶχε is he 
would not have had both (as he did 
have). 

8 81. τ. κλέμμα μὲν: cf. μὴ κλέπτε 
νόῳ, Il. 1. 132. The position of μὲν 
shows that the seven words before κλέμμα 
belong to both κλέμμα and δωροδόκημα. 


lit. 22 was in our power to have a 


ΠΈΡΙ TOY STEbANOY 31 


τοιοῦτον ἐγένετο: ὑπὲρ οὗ καὶ τότε καὶ νῦν Kal ἀεὶ ὁμολογῶ 
» A \ / , ν 3 > 
καὶ πολεμεῖν καὶ διαφέρεσθαι τούτοις. ἕτερον δ᾽ εὐθὺς 
ἐφεξῆς ἔτι τούτου μεῖζον κακούργημα θεάσασθε. ἐπειδὴ 832 «-“ 
Ν ΡΝ , \ ne 4 ε , Ν Ν ᾿ 
γὰρ ὡμολόγησε τὴν εἰρήνην ὁ Φίλιππος προλαβὼν τὴν 
Θρᾷκην διὰ τούτους οὐχὶ πεισθέντας TO ἐμῷ ψηφίσματι, 
a ο Ἂς »* 
πάλιν ὠνεῖται Tap αὐτῶν ὅπως μὴ ἄπιμεν ἐκ Μακεδονίας β 


ἕως τὰ τῆς στρατείας τῆς ἐπὶ τοὺς Φωκέας εὐτρεπῆ ποιή- 5 
σατο σα ἐμὴ, δεῦρ᾽ ἀπαγγειλάντων ἡμῶν ὅτι μέλλει καὶ 
παρασκευάζεται πορεύεσθαι, ἐξέλθοιτε ὑμεῖς καὶ περιπλεύ- ἶ 
σαντες ταῖς τριήρεσιν. εἰς Πύλας ὥσπερ πρότερον κλείσαιυτε 
τὸν τόπον, [ἀλλ᾽ ἅμ’ ἀκούοιτε ταῦτ᾽ ἀπαγγελλόντων ἡμῶν 


κἀκεῖνος ἐντὸς εἴη Πυλῶν καὶ μηδὲν ἔχοιθ᾽ ὑμεῖς ποιῆσαι. 10 


4. καὶ (bef. πολεμεῖν) Σ, 1,1, A2; om. vulg. τουτοισί Ar. 5. θεάσασθε 
before μεῖζον L. 
8 82. 2. ὡμολόγησε =, L, B, vulg.; ὦμοσε 1, (mg.), Ar, B (yp). ὁ om. 
Al. éfew (after ii.) L?, B, vulg.; om. 2, L, Ar. 2. προσλαβὼν Y, V6, (Ar?). 
3. τούτους τοὺς At. 4. ἄπιμεν Bk. Anec. p. 129%, Cob., Vom., West., Lips., BI. ; 
ἀπίωμεν Σ, L, Ar; ἀπίωμεν (οι over w, i.e. ἄποιμεν for ἄπιμεν. Vom.) B; ἀπίωμεν whe 
(ow over μεν) F; ἀπίωσιν vulg. 5. Gws 2, L, A2; ἕως av L (yp), vulg. oT pa- 
τιᾶς L (yp), At. ἀτρεπῆ A2. 6. ἡμῶν =, L, Ar, B (yp), F (yp), ® (yp); ry 
αὐτῶν L (yp), B, vulg. 7. ἐξέλθητε (ν᾽. κλείσητε, ἀκούητε, ἔχητε, 8, 9, το), V6 


8. κλείσαιτε Σ, L; κλείσητε 1, (yp), Al. 2; ere Φ, B (a over rst ΑὟ ; κλείσοιτε 


vulg. 9g. Témrov Z, L, Ar. 2, B (yp), F (yp), Φ (vp) ; ; πορθμὸν L (yp), B, vulg. 
ἡμῶν, Σ, L, Ar; ὑμῶν (7 over b) V6; ὑμῖν τούτων L? (yp), B, vulg. 


4. πολεμεῖν Kal διαφέρεσθαι: these might have had ἀπίοιμεν, corresponding 


represent (in 07. ob/.) the past, the present, 
and the emphatic future indicated by τότε, 
νῦν, and del (M. T. 32, 119). 

8 82. 3. διὰ τούτους οὐχὶ πεισθέντας 
(without τοὺς) is, because of ther disobedi- 
ence, like μετὰ Συρακούσας οἰκισθείσας, 
Thuc. VI. 3, and post urbem conditam. 
This is rare in Greek, where we should 
expect διὰ τὸ μὴ πεισθῆναι (M. T. 829°). 
See § 42, with τῶν... μισθωσάντων. 

4. ὠνεῖται... ὅπως μὴ ἄπιμεν, he bribes 
them (ἴο effect) that we shall not depart 
(M. T. 339): ἄπιμεν (as fut., M. T. 29) 
is more regular after ὠνεῖται than ἀπί- 
ὠμεν, and has commended itself to nearly 
all recent editors, though it rests only on 
a grammarian’s authority. It is difficult 
to decide between the two readings. We 


to ποιήσαιτο (5). 

5. ἕως... ποιήσαιτο, after the historic 
present ὠνεῖται. The clause with ἕως has 
a final force (M. T. 614), the idea being 
that he bribed them to wait long enough 
Sor him to get his army ready. 

6. ἵνα μὴ.. ποιῆσαν (10): the purpose 
of ὠνεῖται. 

7. ἐξέλθουιτε refers only to the land 
[ογοα.---περιπλεύσαντες ὥσπερ πρότερον 
refers to the famous expedition in 352 B.c., 
when Athens stopped Philip at Thermo- 
pylae. See Iv. 17; XIX. 84, 319; Grote 
XI. 403—405; and Hist. § 7. 

8. κλείσαιτε τὸν τόπον, 1.6. make 
Thermopylae impassable. 

9. ἀπαγγελλόντων : present to ἀκούοιτε, 
as ἀπαγγειλάντων in 6 is past to ἐξέλθοιτε. 


33 


5 


Εἶν Ra! > va ins ὙΞ. A SS’ ν 3. ΕΝ ΄ 
34 ὑμᾶς εἰπεῖν καὶ ἀπαγγεῖλαι dv ὧν ἅπαντ᾽ ἀπώλετο. 


95 


Ge AHMOZOENOY> 


C > »“» Ss \ 
οὕτω δ᾽ ἦν ὁ Φίλιππος ἐν φόβῳ καὶ πολλῇ ἀγωνίᾳ, μὴ καὶ 
ταῦτα προειληφότος αὐτοῦ, εἰ πρὸ τοῦ τοὺς Φωκέας ἀπο- 

al > Ν 
λέσθαι ψηφίσαισθε βοηθεῖν, ἐκφύγοι τὰ πράγματ᾽ αὐτὸν, 

Ὁ Ἐν a κ 
ὦστε μισθοῦται τὸν κατάπτυστον τουτονὶ, οὐκέτι κοινῇ μετὰ 

“A 4 4 3 3 > , > ε Ν ~ Ν 
τῶν ἄλλων πρέσβεων, ἀλλ᾽ ἰδίᾳ καθ᾽ αὑτὸν, τοιαῦτα πρὸς 
ἀξιῶ 

> la “ lal 3 

δὲ, ὦ ἄνδρες ᾿Αθηναῖοι, καὶ δέομαι τοῦτο μεμνῆσθαι παρ 

κι ο ᾿ς, 

ὅλον τὸν ἀγῶνα, ὅτι μὴ κατηγορήσαντος Αἰσχίνου μηδὲν 
» la ἴω 399039 ἃ 5 Ν. ,ὔὕ ΡῚ | ar | Ἃ Y 

ἐξω τῆς γραφῆς οὐδ᾽ ἂν ἐγὼ λόγον οὐδέν ἐποιούμην τερον: 

πάσαις δ᾽ αἰτίαις καὶ βλασφημίαις a ἅμα τούτου κεχρημένου 

ἀνάγκη κἀμοὶ πρὸς ἕκαστα τῶν κατηγορημένων μίκρ᾽ ἀπο- 

κρίνασθαι. τίνες οὖν ἦσαν οἵ παρὰ τούτου λόγοι τότε 

ῥηθέντες, καὶ dv ods ἁπᾶντ᾽ ἀπώλετο; ὡς οὐ δεῖ θορυβεῖσθαι 


8 33. 1. καὶ πολλῇ ἀγωνίᾳ Σ, L, Az, F (mg.), ® (mg.), vulg.; om. Ar, B, F, 
®, Y. 2. εἰ πρὸ Tod = (w. ἐκφύγοι in 3), Pal. 2; πρὸ τοῦ (w. καὶ ἐκφύγοι in 3) L, 
vulg. ἀπολέσθαι X, L, Ar; ἀπολ. ἀκούσαντες L?, vulg. 3- ψηφίσαισθε 


vulg. ; ψηφίσησθε x, Al. 2, ; ψηφίσεσθε Ven. βοηθεῖν B, F, Y, Φ; τοῖς Φωκεῦ- 
σιν βοηθεῖν Σ Σ, 1,; βοηθεῖν αὐτοῖς vulg. ἐκφύγοι (w. εἰ in 2) Σ ; καὶ ἐκφύγοι L, Ma 
4. wore πάλιν vulg. ; ; πάλιν om. 2, L}, Bl. 5. ἐδίᾳ καὶ καθ᾽ ἑαυτὸν V6. 
8 84. 1, 2. ἀξιῶ δὲ ὑμᾶς Ars ὑμᾶς om. Σ, L, Az; μεμνῆσθαι ὑμᾶς πὸ μὲ 
3. αγωνα (γ chg’d from ¢, late o after ay, and wva in next line) zi 4. ἐποιούμην 
οὐδένα Νό. 5. πάσαις Σ, 1. ; ἁπάσαις vulg. τ᾽ ἀντοῦ =} (τούτου mg.) ; 7’ 
dur’ (ov above) 1,1 (yp τούτου) ; ταύτου Az. 6. κἀμὲ L (yp), At. KaTnyopn- 
μένων vulg.; κατηγορουμένων (ἡ over ov) L; κατηγορδμένων (δ᾽ corr. for ?) DB; εἰρη- 
μένων Σ (yp), F (mg.), Φ (mg.). 
eat = (yp); ἀπολογήσασθαι F (yp), Φ (yp) ; ἀπολούσαδθιν (γή over v) L (yp)- 
8 35. 2. καὶ οἴῃ. Lips. 


μον 
- 


gleich sinngemiass” (Β].). 

see VI. 35 (end). 
§ 34. τ, 2. ἀξιῶ, 7 ask of you (as 

something ἄξιον) ; Soni 7 entreat. See 

the older editions ἃὃ 61, and note on § 4°, 

omit εἰ and read 4. ἔξω τῆς γραφῆς: he has analy 


§ 33. τ. οὕτω: antecedent of ὥστε 
(4).---ἀγωνίᾳ, conflict (of mind): Vomel | 
refers Hesych. ἐν ἀγωνίᾳ, ἐν μερίμνῃ, 
to this passage. 

2. εἰ πρὸ τοῦ: 
with nearly all mss. 


For ἀπώλετο 


ἀκοκρίνασθαι Σ, L, Ai; ἀποκρίνεσθαι B, vulg. ; — 


καὶ ἐκφύγοι in 3, making ψηφίσαισθε de- 
pend on μή.---πρὸ τοῦ.. ἀπολέσθαι, i.e. 
before he could have time to lay Phocis 
waste: cf. XIX. 123. 

4. ὥστε μισθοῦται: a clear case of 
wore requiring the indicative (M. T. 582, 
583).—ovKért κοινῇ: Aeschines alone 
was indicted for παραπρεσβεία. See ὃ 417. 

6. δι ὧν here and δι᾽ ods in ὃ 352 
approach each other very closely, both 
referring to the same thing: ‘“beides 


(δ 9) justified the discussion of the peace; 
and he repeats his apology now, as West. 
remarks, merely to call special attention 
to what follows.—érovovpyny dv refers to 
his present argument (cf. § 95). -ἕτερον, 
like ἀλλότριον : cf. ἕτερος λόγος οὗτος, ὃ 44%. 

§ 85. 1. οἱ... ῥηθέντες ; see the fuller 
account of this speech in XIX. 20---22. 
Aeschines said that the Thebans had set 
a price on his head for his anti-Theban 
advice to Philip. See Hist. § 44. 


ΠΕΡΙ. TOY STE®ANOY 33 


τῷ παρεληλυθέναι Φίλιππον εἴσω Πυλῶν: ἔσται yap ἅπανθ᾽ i 
2 , » € A x » ae [4 ἮΝ α lA A 
ὅσα βούλεσθ᾽ ὑμεῖς, av ἔχηθ᾽ ἡσυχίαν, καὶ ἀκούσεσθε δυοῖν 
~ ἴω γι ea ο 
ἢ τριῶν ἡμερῶν, οἷς μὲν ἐχθρὸς ἥκει, φίλον αὐτὸν yeyern- 5 | 
P ® Ν 7 5 ’ὔ 5 / i > \ Ν Ἂν ας ᾿ 
μένον, οἷς δὲ φίλος, τοὐναντίον ἐχθρόν. οὐ γὰρ τὰ ῥήματα 


\ 3 , x na ΄, on fal 3 ,ὕ 3 \ it 
Tas οἰκειότητας ἔφη βεβαιοῦν, μάλα σεμνῶς ὀνομάζων, ἀλλὰ i 
TO ταὐτὰ συμφέρειν: συμφέρειν δὲ Φιλίππῳ καὶ Φωκεῦσι | 

“ He Ne ε , 7 ἣν 9 , oe ne } i 
καὶ ὑμῖν ὁμοίως ἅπασι τῆς ἀναλγησίας καὶ τῆς βαρύτητος Ἷ 
΄Ν“Ν aw aw aw ἢ) 
ἀπαλλαγῆναι τῆς τῶν Θηβαίων. ταῦτα δ᾽ ἀσμένως τινὲς 86 } 
4 A lal if} 
ἤκουον αὐτοῦ διὰ τὴν τόθ᾽ ὑποῦσαν ἀπέχθειαν πρὸς τοὺς | 
΄, , > , Ν nA > 52 Χ 3 > , h 
Θηβαίους. τί οὖν συνέβη μετὰ ταῦτ᾽ εὐθὺς, οὐκ εἰς μακράν; ; 


4. ἂν Z, L; ἐὰν vulg. 
2, L, Ar. 2, F, &, O; αὐτὸν ἐχθρόν vulg. 
§ 36. 2. τόθ᾽ ὑπάρχουσαν At. 


3. τῷ παρεληλυθέναι: he begged the 
people not to be disturbed by news that 
Ph. had already passed Thermopylae. 

4. δυοῖν ἢ τριῶν ἡμερῶν: so XIX, 
20, 74: 

5, 6. οἷς μὲν, the Phocians; οἷς δὲ, 
_ the Thebans. 

6. ῥήματα: e.g. the Thebans’ title of 
allies of Philip (cf. ὃ 213°). 

7. μᾶλα σεμνῶς ὀνομάζων, wsing very 
solemn expressions. He often jokes about 
the σεμνότης of Aesch. Bl. quotes §§ 130, 
133, 258, and XIX. 23, κατέβη μάλα 
σεμνώς. 

8. συμφέρειν᾽ συμφέρειν: a striking 
ἀναστροφή. 

9. ἀναλγησίας, want of feeling, ex- 
plained by the Schol. as ἀναισθησίας. 
There can be little doubt that this word, 
like ἀναίσθητοι in ὃ 431, refers to the 
dulness and lack of keen perception for 
which the Thebans were proverbial. See 
West. on XxX. 109, and his references: 
Nep. Epam. 5, 2, namque illi genti plus 
virilum quam ingenii, and Alcib. 11, 3, 
omnes enim Boeotii magis firmitati cor- 
poris quam ingenii acumini inserviunt; 
Cic. de Fato Iv. 7, Athenis tenue caelum, 
ex quo acutiores putantur Attici; cras- 
sum Thebis, itaque pingues Thebani et 
valentes; Hor. Epist. 11. 1, 244, Boeo- 
tum in crasso aere natum. This dulness, 
and the consequent illiteracy of Thebes 


G. Dp; 


ἐὰν aynre Al.. 5. αὐτὸν om. V6. 6. ἐχθρόν 


8. συμφέρειν δὲ Σ ; συμφέρει δὲ L, vulg. 
3. μετὰ τοῦτ Y. 


compared with Athens, gave rise to the 
proverb Βοιωτίαν ὗν, Pind. Ol. VI. go: 
see the Schol., τὸ ἀρχαῖον ὄνειδος, τουτ- 
éort τὴν παλαιὰν διαβολὴν τὴν ἐπὶ τῇ 
ἀμουσίᾳ. The ἀναλγησία and ἀναισθησία 
of the Thebans were said to make them 
also unfeeling towards enemies, and this 
appears in the terms ὠμότης and πονηρία 
which Demosth. applied to them in 
355 B.C. (XX. 109). Cf. ἀναλγήτως, Soph. 
Aj. 1333. Now he prefers the milder 
terms βαρύτης, overbearingness (see § 19°) 
and dvadynoia. Aristotle, Eth. 111. 7, 7» 
says of a man lacking in φόβος, εἴη δ᾽ ἄν 
Tis μαινόμενος ἢ ἀνάλγητος, εἰ μηδὲν 
φοβοῖτο, μήτε σεισμὸν μήτε κύματα, 
and in Ill. 11, 7, of those insensible to 
pleasure, ἐλλείποντες δὲ τὰ περὶ Tas 
ἡδονὰς καὶ ἧττον ἢ δεῖ χαίροντες οὐ πάνυ 
γίνονται" οὐ γὰρ ἀνθρωπική ἐστιν ἡ τοιαύτη 
ἀναισθησία. Aristotle here means stu- 
pidity and slowness, not moral obliquity, 
by both ἀνάλγητος and ἀναίσθητος. 

§ 36. 2. τὴν τόθ᾽ ὑποῦσαν (cf. ὕπ- 
ἐστι, ὃ 315"): a mild way of speaking of 
the enmity against Thebes in 346 B.c. 
See notes on 88 18, 19. 

3. οὐκ εἰς μακράν (sc. ὁδόν), 707 much 
later, not a long way off, i.e. from Sciro- 
phorion τό to 27: εἰς of looking forward 
to an end, as in ὃ 1517, εἰς πυλαίαν. So 
Ar. Vesp. 454. 


34 AHMOZOENOY2 


TOUS μὲν Φωκέας ἀπολέσθαι καὶ κατασκαφῆναι τὰς πόλεις 
5 αὐτῶν, ὑμᾶς δ᾽ ἡσυχίαν ἀγαγόντας καὶ. τούτῳ πεισθέντας 
μικρὸν ὕστερον σκευαγωγεῖν ἐκ τῶν ἀγρῶν, τοῦτον δὲ 

χρυσίον λαβεῖν, καὶ ἔτι πρὸς τούτοις τὴν μὲν ἀπέχθειαν τὴν 

πρὸς Θηβαίους καὶ Θετταλοὺς τῇ πόλει γενέσθαι, τὴν δὲ 
37 χάριν τὴν ὑπὲρ τῶν πεπραγμένων Φιλίππῳ. ὅτι δ᾽ οὕτω 
ταῦτ᾽ ἔχει, λέγε μοι τό τε τοῦ Καλλισθένους ψήφισμα καὶ 
τὴν ἐπιστολὴν τοῦ Φιλίππου, ἐξ ὧν ἀμφοτέρων ταῦθ᾽ ἅπανθ᾽ 
λέγε. 


Cc oA » , 
ὑμῖν ἔσται φανερά. 


5 ΨΗΦΙΣΜΑ. 


[Ἐπὶ Μνησιφίλου ἄρχοντος, συγκλήτου ἐκκλησίας ὑπὸ στρα- 
τηγῶν καὶ πρυτάνεων, [καὶ] βουλῆς γνώμῃ, μαιμακτηριῶνος δεκάτῃ 
ἀπιόντος, Καλλισθένης ᾿Ετεονίκου Φαληρεὺς εἶπε μηδένα ᾿Αθη- 
ναίων μηδεμιᾷ παρευρέσει ἐν τῇ χώρᾳ κοιταῖον γίγνεσθαι, ἀλλ᾽ 
10 ἐν ἄστει καὶ Πειραιεῖ, ὅσοι μὴ ἐν τοῖς φρουρίοις εἰσὶν ἀποτεταγ- 

μένοι" τούτων δ᾽ ἑκάστους ἣν παρέλαβον τάξιν διατηρεῖν μήτε 
ὃς δ᾽ ἂν ἀπειθήσῃ τῷδε 
τῷ ψηφίσματι, ἔνοχος ἔστω τοῖς ΤῊΣ προδοσίας ἐπιτιμίοις, ἐὰν 


> / / > A 
38 ἀφημερεύοντας ae QATOKOLTOUYTAS. 


μή τι ἀδύνατον ἐπιδεμονυῇ περὶ ἑαυτὸν ὄν" περὶ δὲ τοῦ ἀδυνάτου 
ἐπικρινέτω ὁ ἐπὶ τῶν ὅπλων στρατηγὸς καὶ ὁ ἐπὶ τῆς διοικήσεως 
5 καὶ ὁ γραμματεὺς τῆς βουλῆς. κατακομίζειν δὲ καὶ τὰ ἐκ τῶν 
ἀγρῶν πάντα τὴν ταχίστην, τὰ μὲν ἐντὸς σταδίων ἑκατὸν εἴκοσιν 
εἰς ἄστυ καὶ Πειραιᾶ, τὰ δὲ ἐκτὸς σταδίων ἑκατὸν εἴκοσιν εἰς 
Ἐλευσῖνα καὶ Φυλὴν καὶ "Αφιδναν καὶ Ῥαμνοῦντα καὶ Σούνιον. 


4. Φωκέας D; ταλαιπώρους Φωκ. L, vulg. 5. ἀγαγόντας Σ, 1,; ἄγοντας vulg. 
8. πρὸς τοὺς Θηβ. B, ®, Y, O. γεγενῆσθαι Ar. ὁ. ὑπὸ Ol. τῶν πραγμά- 
των A2. 

§ 87. 3. τὴν τοῦ Φιλ. vulg. ; τὴν om. Σ, L, O, Az. 3, 4. ταῦθ᾽... ἔσται 2, 


L; dm. ταῦτα ἔσται ὑμῖν At; ἄπ. bu. ταῦτ᾽ ἔσται Aa; bm. ἅπ. ταῦτ᾽ ἔσται B, vulg. 


4. τοὺς μὲν... .ἐκ τῶν ἀγρῶν (6): eleven trast to σκευαγωγεῖν. --τὴν μὲν ἀπέχθειαν. 


days after the report of the second embassy 
to the Assembly, the alarming news of 
the surrender of the Phocians at Thermo- 
pylae arrived. See Hist. § 47. 

6. okevaywyeiv: as ordered by the 
decree of Callisthenes (§ 37). 

7. χρυσίον λαβεῖν : in malicious con- 


Φιλίππῳ: ie. Athens by her vacillat- 
ing course got nothing but the ill will of © 
Philip’s Greek friends, who believed that 


she would have protected the Phocians if . 


she had dared to; while Philip had all 
the credit for ending the Sacred War and 
punishing the sacrilegious Phocians. 


‘ 


1 

j 

\ 
| 


= 


ee ee ee 


ΠΕΡΙ TOY STEPANOY 35 


5 > as. 4 A > / Ν 3 ’ὔ 5 A 
Ap ἐπὶ ταύταις ταῖς ἐλπίσι τὴν εἰρήνην ἐποιεῖσθε, 
Ἃ out eae | ΄ ΞΕ a: @ ε / 
ἢ ταῦτ᾽ ἐπηγγέλλεθ᾽ ὑμῖν οὗτος ὁ μισθωτός; το 
Ζ \ Ν > % ἃ » [4 \ la 
Λέγε δὴ τὴν ἐπιστολὴν ἣν ἔπεμψε Φίλιππος μετὰ ταῦτα. 39 


ἘΠΙΣΤΟΛΗ. β 


[Βασιλεὺς Μακεδόνων Φίλιππος ᾿Αθηναίων τῇ βουλῇ καὶ τῷ 
δήμῳ χαίρειν. ἴστε ἡμᾶς παρεληλυθότας εἴσω Πυλῶν καὶ τὰ 
κατὰ τὴν Φωκίδα ὑφ᾽ ἑαυτοὺς πεποιημένους, καὶ ὅσα μὲν ἑκουσίως 5 
39 προσετίθετο τῶν πολισμάτων, φρουρὰς εἰσαγηοχότας, τὰ δὲ μὴ 
| ὑπακούοντα κατὰ κράτος λαβόντες καὶ ἐξανδραποδισάμενοι κατε- 
σκάψαμεν. ἀκούων δὲ καὶ ὑμᾶς παρασκευάζεσθαι βοηθεῖν αὐτοῖς 
γέγραφα ὑμῖν, ἵνα μὴ ἐπὶ πλέον ἐνοχλῆσθε περὶ τούτων" τοῖς μὲν 
γὰρ ὅλοις οὐδὲν μέτριόν μοι δοκεῖτε ποιεῖν, τὴν εἰρήνην συνθέμενοι τὸ β 
καὶ ὁμοίως ἀντιπαρεξάγοντες, καὶ ταῦτα οὐδὲ συμπεριειλημμένων 
τῶν Φωκέων ἐν ταῖς κοιναῖς ἡμῶν συνθήκαις. ὥστε ἐὰν μὴ ἐμ- 
μένητε τοῖς ὡμολογημένοις, οὐδὲν προτερήσετε ἔξω τοῦ ἐφθακέναι 
ἀδικοῦντες. 

; 


> ἴω A A 
Ακούετε ὡς σαφῶς δηλοῖ καὶ διορίζεται ἐν τῇ πρὸς 40 
ε w~ 3 “~ Ἀ la ο : 
ὑμᾶς ἐπιστολῇ πρὸς τοὺς ἑαυτοῦ συμμάχους, OTL ἐγὼ πε- 
Ὁ “a 3 
ποίηκα ταῦτ᾽ ἀκόντων ᾿Αθηναίων καὶ λυπουμένων, 
ν 3 » > A 5 a Ν Ν ’ 
WOT, εἰπερ εὖ φρονεῖτε, ὦ Θηβαῖοι καὶ Θετταλοὶ, τού- 


§ 88. 9. τὴν εἰρήνην ἐποιεῖσθε Σ, 1.1, A2, Β, F, O (ῆ for εὖ) ; τ. εἰρ. ἐποιήσασθε 
LL? (yp), Ar; ἐποιεῖσθε τ. εἰρ. vulg. 
§39. 1. δὴ τὴν Σ,1,, Α5, Β, F,®; δ᾽ αὐτὴν V6; δ᾽ αὐτὴν τὴν Ar; δ᾽ αὖ τὴν vulg. 
ἔπεμψε Σ, 1., Az; δεῦρ᾽ ἔπεμψε vulg. 
8 40. 2. ὑμᾶς (ἡ over ὑ) L; ηὕμας V6. 2,3. ἐγὼ πεποίηκα ταῦτα >}, L; 
ἐγὼ ταῦτα πεποί. Σ" ; ταῦτα ἐγὼ πεπ. vulg. ; πεποίηκα ἀκοντων Oxyrh. papyrus begins. 


7 


§ 88. 10. ταῦτ᾽ ἐπηγγέλλεθ᾽; i.e. with what Philip had done for the Thebans 
how does the decree just read to you and Thessalians, to justify what is said of 
agree with the report of Aeschines_ it in ὃ 40. Grote remarks that Demosth. 
(§ 35)? would have spoken much more severely 

§ 39. This letter has few of the marks _ of a letter so insolent as this one. Still 
by which its genuineness can be abso- Westermann says: “65 ist mdglich dass 
lutely denied or established. It must be es echt ist.” It is safest to class it with 
remembered that there is (since Bentley) the other documents as a forgery. 

a general presumption against the genuine- § 40. 2. πρὸς συμμάχους, with δη- 
ness of ancient epistles; and this is in λοῖ καὶ διορίζεται. The letter, though 
_ very bad company. The genuine letter, addressed to the Athenians, was really 
it would seem, should have more definite written for Philip’s allies.—ért before 
allusions to the dissatisfaction of Athens the direct quotation (M.T. 711). 


3—2 


—————————— 


36 AHMOZOENOY2 


\ > Ἂν ε ’ὔ > Ν Ν ’ὔ 
5 Tous μὲν ἐχθροὺς ὑπολήψεσθε ἐμοὶ δὲ πιστεύσετε.--- 
5 / A Live? / A Xess / vi 
οὐ τούτοις τοῖς ῥήμασι γράψας, ταῦτα δὲ βουλόμενος δεικνύ- 
lal > 
ναι. τοιγαροῦν ἐκ τούτων wyeT ἐκείνους λαβὼν εἰς τὸ μηδ 
ὁτιοῦν προορᾶν τῶν μετὰ ταῦτα μηδ᾽ αἰσθάνεσθαι, ἀλλ᾽ 
ι ἐᾶσαι πάντα τὰ πράγματα ἐκεῖνον ὑφ᾽ ἑαυτῷ ποιήσασθαι" 
το ἐξ ὧν ταῖς παρούσαις συμφοραῖς οἱ ταλαίπωροι κέχρηνται. 
41 ὁ δὲ ταύτης τῆς πίστεως αὐτῷ συνεργὸς καὶ συναγωνιστὴς, 
SF Fale te ee J τ \ A Ν ᾽ὔ 4 la ieee F 
καὶ ὁ δεῦρ᾽ ἀπαγγείλας τὰ ψευδῆ καὶ φενακίσας ὑμᾶς, οὗτός 


9 ε \ ,» > , A , \ it et aT 
ἐστιν ὁ TA Θηβαίων ὀδυρόμενος νῦν πάθη καὶ διεξιὼν ως 


> Ν \ ΄ὕἹ \ σι > la) A %. msi ¥ 
οἰκτρὰ, καὶ τούτων καὶ τῶν EV Φωκεῦσι κακῶν καὶ οσ adda 


/ eg ε / ΦΎΑ, x » 

ς πεπόνθασιν ot Ἕλληνες ἁπάντων αὐτὸς ὧν αἴτιος. 
in’ 4 εν \ 3 ~ 3 ἘΝ ae) / > , 
γὰρ ὅτι σὺ μὲν ἀλγεῖς ἐπὶ τοῖς συμβεβηκόσιν, Αἰσχίνη, 

\ bp ta Θ β / aN “A Lowe | » 3 A B ΓΝ ae ἊΝ 
καὶ τοὺς Θηβαίους ἐλεεῖς, KTH ἔχων ἐν τῇ Βοιωτίᾳ Kat 
a Ν > , > eS Ν ΄ὕ ὰ 4. 2). Κ 3, ὌΝΛΖ 
γεωργῶν τὰ ἐκείνων, ἐγὼ δὲ χαίρω, ὃς εὐθὺς ἐξῃτούμ, 


ε \ ἴω ἴω " 
ΤΟ TOV Ταῦτα πράξαντος. 


ἘΣ ὑπολήμψεσθε ἜΣ: 7. ἐς Oxyrh. 
Oxyrh. 

§ 41. 2, 3. 
At; νῦν om. V6. 4. 
ἔχων L, vulg. 8, εξητούμην =. 


8. προορᾶν after ταῦτα At. 10. ταλαί- 
πωροι =; ταλαί. Θηβαῖοι L, Β, vulg.; ταλ. κέχρ. Θηβ. Ar; Kexp. οἱ ταλαι. Θηβαιοι 


οὗτός ἐστιν L, vulg.; ὁυτεστι (ds over τε) Σ. 
καὶ (bef. τούτων) om. Az. iE 


δῆλον 


δα" 


Vv 
sur Av 


3. νῦν ὀδυρόμενος 
κτῆμ᾽ ἔχων Σ ; κτήματ᾽ 


7. ᾧχετ᾽ ἐκείνους λαβὼν, he carried 
them (his allies) away (M.T. 805); the 
figure is continued in εἰς τό with the 
infinitives. 

10. ot ταλαίπωροι: Θηβαῖοι is added 
in all Mss. except 2. Of course the 
destruction of Thebes by Alexander is 
chiefly meant, and this suggests the di- 
gression in ὃ 41; but the condition of 
Thessaly after the peace, which had been 
in Philip’s power since 352 B.C., may well 
be included. See Ix. 26: Θετταλία πῶς 
ἔχει; οὐχὶ τὰς πολιτείας καὶ τὰς πόλεις 
αὐτῶν παρήρηται καὶ τετραρχίας κατέ- 
στησεν, ἵνα μὴ μόνον κατὰ πόλεις ἀλλὰ 
καὶ κατ᾽ ἔθνη δουλεύωσιν ; See also VII. 
aa + XUK 260, Ν 

8 41. 1. ὁ δὲ.. συνεργὸς, i.e. Le who 
helped him thus to persuade his allies: 
with πίστεως cf. πιστεύσετε, ὃ 40°. 

2. ἀπαγγείλας τὰ ψευδῆ: see ὃ 35. 
In ΧΙΧ. 4, Demosth. puts ὧν ἀπήγγειλε, 


Ϊ 
his report, first among the things for , 
which an ambassador should render an 
account. od 

3. ὀδυρόμενος : see the solemn and 
eloquent invocation of Aesch. in III. 133, 
Θῆβαι δὲ, Θῆβαι, πόλις ἀστυγείτων; K.T.A., 
with 156, 157. 

7. «Typ ἔχων: Aesch. is charged 
with holding a confiscated Theban estate 
(κτῆμα. so Σ᾽ alone) by the gift of Alex- 
ander; as in XIX. 145 Philocrates and 
Aeschines are charged with having κτή- 
ματα καὶ γεωργίαι παμπληθεῖς in Phocis 
by gift of Philip. We have no inde- © 
pendent evidence on either of these 
charges. 

8. ἐξῃτούμην : Demosth. was among 
the eight or ten Attic orators who were 
demanded by Alexander after his destruc- 
tion of Thebes in 335 B.c.; Aeschines 
was not. See Grote XII. 59—62. 


—_— ὦ wae aa. + 1 “ ν 


ΠΕΡῚ TOY STEANOY 37 | 


᾿Αλλὰ γὰρ ἐμπέπτωκα εἰς λόγους, οὺς αὐτίκα μᾶλλον 42 
ἴσως ἁρμόσει λέγειν. ἐπάνειμι δὴ πάλιν ἐπὶ τὰς ἀποδείξεις 
ὡς τὰ τούτων ἀδικήματα τῶν νυνὶ παρόντων πραγμάτων > | 
γέγονεν αἴτια. cae 

Ἐπειδὴ γὰρ ἐξηπάτησθε μὲν ὑμεῖς ὑπὸ τοῦ Φιλίππου ς 
διὰ τούτων τῶν ἐν ταῖς πρεσβείαις μισθωσάντων ἑαυτοὺς 
καὶ οὐδὲν ἀληθὲς ὑμῖν ἀπαγγειλάντων, ἐξηπάτηντο δὲ οἱ ᾿ 
ταλαίπωροι Φωκεῖς καὶ ἀνήρηντο al πόλεις αὐτῶν, τί ἐγένετο; Ι 
οἵ μὲν κατάπτυστοι Θετταλοὶ καὶ ἀναίσθητοι Θηβαῖοι φίλον, 43 


᾿ 
3 4 ΄“ Ἂς / ε A / > > A ) 
εὐεργέτην, σωτῆρα τὸν Φίλιππον yyovvTo’ πάντ᾽ ἐκεῖνος ᾿ 
> ee 5. Χ ‘ » ¥ 7 , j 
ἣν αὐτοῖς: οὐδὲ φωνὴν ἤκουον εἴ τις ἄλλο τι βούλοιτο ; 
’ ε “Ὁ 3 ε / Ἂς “4 Ν at 
λέγειν. ὑμεῖς δ᾽ ὑφορώμενοι τὰ πεπραγμένα Kal δυσχε-. ἢ 
ραίνοντες ἤγετε τὴν εἰρήνην ὅμως: οὐ γὰρ ἣν ὃ τι ἂν 5 β 
> A \ so ΤΙΣ ε , eon 
ἐποιεῖτε. καὶ οἱ ἄλλοι δ᾽ Ἕλληνες, ὁμοίως ὑμῖν πεφενα- 


κισμένοι καὶ διημαρτηκότες ὧν ἤλπισαν, ἦγον τὴν εἰρήνην 
‘ ‘ 


§ 42. 1. αὐτίκα μάλα ΑΙ, Hermog, (w. ὕστερον for ἴσως). 2. ἴσως ἁρμόσει 
λέγειν D, L, Α5, Β,Ο ; ἁρμόσει λέγειν ἴσως vulg.; ἴσως om. V6 and Oxyrh. δὲ (for 
δὴ) V6, Oxyrh. (by corr.). ν[υν παλιν (Ὁ) Oxyrh. εἰς (for ἐπὶ) V6. 43. ἀδικήματα 
z, Li, Oxyrh.; doc. καὶ δωροδοκήματα Σ (yp), Al; δωροδ. kal adux. L?, B, vulg. 
4. δίς Al. 6. ἑαυτοὺς Al; ἑαυτοὺς TH Φιλίππῳ Σ Σ, ΤῊ vulg. ., eauTous [exer |vw 
Oxyrh. Perhaps τῷ Φιλίππῳ here, omitting ὑπὸ τοῦ Φιλ. in 5, is correct. 
8. ταλαίπωροι om. V6. τί καὶ éyévero; Az, ἐγένετο over γέγονεν ΝΟ. 

8 43. 2. Φιλιππὸν Oxyrh. 3. οὐδὲ Σ, Ar. 2; καὶ οὐδὲ 1, (corr.), vulg. 
4 τις ΑἹ. 6. ἐποιεῖτε Σ, Ar, Oxyrh.; ἐποιεῖτε μόνοι L, B, vulg.; ἐποιῆτε μόνοι Ο, 


= 


2 ae Se 


o> ge 


§§ 42—49. After the digression in § 43. 1. ἀναίσθητοι: see note on 
§ 41, the orator here speaks of the § 359. 
disastrous consequences which have come 2. πάντ᾽ ἐκεῖνος ἦν : cf. πάντ᾽ ἦν 
from the peace and from the corruption ᾿Αλέξανδρος, XXIII. 120; Εὔβοια αὐτοῖς 
by which it was made, and of the miser- πάντα ἦν, Thuc. VIII. 95; Demetrius iis 
able fate of most of the traitors in Greece unus omnia est, Liv. XL. 11. (See West.) 
who aided Philip in his schemes. 3. οὐδὲ... βούλοιτο (M.T. 462): ἤκουον 
8 42. 5. ἐπειδὴ here has three plu- 5 strongly frequentative, like ἡγοῦντο (2), 
perfects, while commonly it has the less and ἄλλο τι is anything opposed to φίλον, 
precise aorist, as in §§ 251, 321(M.T. 59). εὐεργέτην, σωτῆρα. 


So in Latin fostguam venit is more 4. ὑφορώμενοι, viewsne with suspicion 
common than fostguam venerat. Both (ὑπό like sud in szsficzo). 

ἐπειδή and fostguam contain the idea of 5. οὐ, ποιεῖτε: most Mss. add μόνοι. 
after that, which the plpf. only empha- _‘ This passage represents the state of mind 
sizes. in which Demosthenes delivered his 
6. διὰ τούτων τῶν......μισθωσάντων speech on the Peace (V.) in 346 B.c. See 


(i.e. of ἐμίσθωσαν) : contrast διὰ τούτους Hist. ὃ 50. 
οὐχὶ πεισθέντας, ὃ 32°, and see note. 


38 


AHMOZOENOY2 


¥ \ Sal , 9. 9 ΝΥ 9 ᾿ 
[ ἄσμενοι, καὶ] αὐτοὶ τρόπον τιν᾽ ἐκ πολλοῦ πολεμούμενοι. 
"ἢ 
ὅτε γὰρ περιιὼν Φίλιππος ᾿Ιλλυριοὺς καὶ Τριβαλλοὺς, τινὰς 
δὲ καὶ τῶν Ἑλλήνων κατεστρέφετο, καὶ δυνάμεις πολλὰς 
Ἂς ᾽ὔ 3 Al? 11 + ον ~ / A > al ἊΨ 
καὶ μεγάλας ἐποιεῖθ᾽ ὑφ᾽ ἑαυτῷ, καί τινες τῶν ἐκ τῶν πόλεων 


_ ἐπὶ τῇ τῆς εἰρήνης ἐξουσίᾳ βαδίζοντες ἐκεῖσε διεφθείροντο, 


45 


ὧν εἷς οὗτος ἦν, τότε πάντες ἐφ᾽ οὺς ταῦτα παρεσκευάζετ᾽ 
3 \ eS gee Y , 
εἰ δὲ μὴ ἠσθάνοντο, ἕτερος λόγος 
ἐγὼ μὲν γὰρ προὔλεγον καὶ διεμαρτυ- 


ἐκεῖνος ἐπολεμοῦντο. 
οὗτος, οὐ πρὸς ἐμέ. 

7ὔ Ν -Ὰ 21: la >-X% Ν [2 ͵ὕ ε δὲ / 
ρόμην Kal Tap ὑμῖν ἀεὶ Kal ὅποι πεμφθείην: αἱ δὲ πόλεις 


8. «ἄσμενοι, καὶ vulg., VOm., West., Bl.; om. Σ, Oxyrh., Bk. πολλου xpovou 


Oxyrh. 
844. 1. 
ελληνων Oxyrh. 2P 
5. παρεσκευάζεθ 2. 

8 45. 1. διεμαρτυράμην At. 2. 


8. [ἄσμενοι, kal]: I have bracketed 
these words, since the authority of the 
Oxyrhynchus papyrus is now (Nov. 1899) 
added to that of Σ᾽ for omitting 
{πε η.---αὐτοὶ... πολεμούμενοι, though they 
themselves in a certain way had been 
.warred against for a long time: πολεμού- 
μενοι (impf.) is past to ἦγον, which covers 
the whole time of the peace to 340 B.C. 
‘See ἐπολεμοῦντο, ὃ 445. 

§ 44. 1. ᾿Ιλλυριοὺς καὶ Τριβαλλοὺς: 
Diodorus (XVI. 69) mentions a victorious 
inroad of Philip into Illyria in 344 B.c., 
and Porphyrius Tyr. (Miiller, Hist. Gr. 
111. p. 691) says of Philip, οὗτος τοὺς 
περὶ τὴν χώραν. ἅπαντας ἐδουλώσατο πολε- 
μίους, βουληθεὶς καὶ αὐτοὺς “Ἑλληνας ὑπὸ 


χεῖρα ποιήσασθαι, μεγάλην κτησάμενος 
δύναμιν, καὶ Τριβαλλοὺς ὑποτάξας. 


‘See Schaefer 11. 346. 

2. Ἑλλήνων : see Grote XI. 612— 
614, and Hist. 88 51, 58—61.—8vvepets, 
like our forces, but including money as 
well as troops: see ὃ 2337 with Bl.’s 
note, 

3. τῶν ἐκ τῶν πόλεων: cf. ὃ 145°. 
‘He counts Aesch. as one of those who 
took advantage of the peace to. visit 
‘Macedonia, implying that the process of 
corruption was still going on. In ΧΙΧ. 
13 he says he first discovered the corrup- 


Φίλιππος Σ, At, Oxyrh.; ὁ Φιλ. L, B, vulg. 
ὑφ᾽ ἑαυτῷ ἐποιεῖτο O. 
6. ἕτερος ὁ λόγος (6 erased) Σ; ἕτερος λόγος L, vulg. 


αὐεὶ δ, L. 


I, 2. Kat τινας τῶν 
και τινες εκ των πόλεων Oxyrh. 


tion of Aesch. on the return of the first 
embassy in the spring of 346 B.c. 

6. ἕτερος λόγος οὗτος, “his is another 
matter: cf. ἄλλος ἂν εἴη λόγος οὗτος, 
IX. 16; ἄλλος ἂν ἦν λόγος, [X111.] 7. In 
all these ἄλλος (ἕτερος) λόγος is predicate. 
In Plat. Leg. 634 Ὁ, ὁ λόγος ἂν ἕτερος εἴη, 
the construction is different. 

ὃ 45. 1. Stepaprupdpnv, protested 
(called Gods and men.to witness): cf. 
obtestor. See § 1998 and VI. 20. 

2. παρ᾽ ὑμῖν probably refers to ora- 
tions VI., VIII. and IX.—6trou πεμφθείην, 
whithersoever 7 was sent, referring to the 
various embassies mentioned in VI. 19, 
1X. 72, in § 244 (below), and probably to 
others. In ὃ 2444 we have ὅποι ἐπέμφθην, 
referring to some of the same embassies 
as ὅποι πεμφθείην here. But there the 
negative form of the leading clause, ovda- 
μοῦ... ἀπῆλθον, makes it particular, not 
general; and its verb is aorist, not im- 
perfect (as here); the relative clause is 
therefore particular and has the indicative 
regularly (M.T. 536). If he had said — 
7 always came off superior in ὃ 244%, — 
we should have ὅποι πεμφθείην there: 
see ἐν ols κρατηθεῖεν ... κατεστρέφετο, — 
§ 244°. West. says of 8 244: ““ἐπέμφθην, 
objectiv gefasst, dagegen § 45 ὅποι mep- 
φθείην.᾽ (2). on 


MEP] TOY STEPANOY 30 


ἐνόσουν, τῶν μὲν ἐν τῷ πολιτεύεσθαι καὶ πράττειν Swpo- 
41 δοκούντων καὶ διαφθειρομένων ἐπὶ χρήμασι, τῶν δ᾽ ἰδιωτῶν 
καὶ πολλῶν τὰ μὲν οὐ προορωμένων, τὰ δὲ τῇ καθ᾽ ἡμέραν 5 
ῥᾳστώνῃ καὶ σχολῇ δελεαζομένων, καὶ τοιουτονί τι πάθος 
πεπονθότων ἁπάντων, πλὴν οὐκ ἐφ᾽ ἑαυτοὺς ἑκάστων οἰο- 
sy Ν Ν ν a \ a he ΄ ἄνα A 
μένων τὸ δεινὸν ἥξειν καὶ dua τῶν ἑτέρων κινδύνων τὰ ἑαυτῶν 
εἶτ οἶμαι συμβέβηκε 46 
τοῖς μὲν πλήθεσιν ἀντὶ τῆς πολλῆς καὶ ἀκαίρου ῥᾳθυμίας 
μὲν πλή ῆ ἢ ρου ῥᾳθυμ 


ἀσφαλῶς σχήσειν ὅταν βούλωνται. 


Ν > / > ΄, ~ \ 4 Ν 
τὴν ἐλευθερίαν ἀπολωλεκέναι, τοῖς δὲ προεστηκόσι καὶ 
τἄλλα πλὴν ἑαυτοὺς οἰομένοις πωλεῖν πρώτους ἑαυτοὺς πε- 

/ > / 3 Ν Ν ,ὔ Ν / a / 
πρακόσιν αἰσθέσθαι: ἀντὶ yap φίλων καὶ ξένων, ἃ τότες 
Lie 4 ἘΠῚ» > / A 7, \ ~ > \ 
ὠνομάζοντο ἡνίκα ἐδωροδόκουν, νῦν κόλακες καὶ θεοῖς ἐχθροὶ 

Ν A > ἃ ΄ Μὸν" ἐν ΄ es Ν Ν ¥ p 
καὶ TaAN a προσήκει πάντ᾽ ἀκούουσιν. “οὐδεὶς yap, ἀνδρεξ 47 
3 A Ν ἴω / 4 a / > 
Αθηναῖοι, τὸ τοῦ προδιδόντος συμφέρον ζητῶν χρήματ 
ἀναλίσκει, οὐδ᾽ ἐπειδὰν ὧν ἂν πρίηται κύριος γένηται τῷ 


6. τὸιουτονει Σ; τοιουτονί Ar; τοιοῦτον L, B, vulg. 7. ἑκάστων οἰομένων 
Zz, L, Ar; οἷομ. ἐκ. vulg. 8. Kal διὰ. 2, Li, Ar, Y; ἀλλὰ διὰ ΤΑ vulg. 
9. σχήσειν Σ, L1; σχήσειν ὑπολαμβανόντων L*, vulg. 

ὃ 46. 4. πλὴν εαυτοὺς > (ε erased), L, vulg.; πλὴν ἄλλους F (yp). 5. ἀισθε- 

᾿ς σθαι Σ (η over ist ac), L ( ἡ over rst a and ε); αἰσθέσθαι Α5 ; ἠσθῆσθαι vulg., Oxyrh. 

ἃ om. =. - θεοισιν corr. to Geos Oxyrh. 7. πάντα ἀκούουσιν" εἰκότως 
vulg.; εἰκότως om. Σ, L, Β, F, ΟἹ. 

8 47. 1. ἄνδρες Σ,1.,; ὦ ἄνδρες vulg. 2. προδόντος Φ. 3. ὧν πρίηται 


Al; πριηται ae (?) Oxyrh.: *‘ the word following πρίηται is neither κύριος nor γένη- 
ται" (Kenyon). 


3. ἐνόσουν : Demosth. is especially 8. τῶν ἑτέρων κινδύνων, others’ (not 


fond of this figure of a diseased state: 
τσ 1k. 12, 30, 50; XIX. 259 
(West.).—tev...mparrev (one substan- 
tive): cf. § 117 and note on § 4°. 

4. ἐπὶ χρημάσι, for (with a view to) 
money; not by money, like ὑπὸ χρημάτων. 
Vémel explains, ‘‘ corrumpi sub pecunia 


‘promissa, non data nisi post perpetratam 


proditionem.”—i8twray: here opposed to 
τῶν...πράττειν (3), private citizens; gene- 
‘rally, any men who are not of a given 
class, as mot senators, X1X. 18; cf. ἰατρὸς 


- καὶ ἰδιώτης, Thuc. 11. 48. 


6, δελεαζομένων, caught, as by a bait 


(δέλεαρ). ---τοιουτονὶ.... πεπονθότων is ex- 
- plained by ἑκάστων οἰομένων κ.τ.λ. 


7. πλὴν οὐκ ἐφ᾽ ἑαυτοὺς, upon all but 
themselves. 


other) dangers. 

ὃ 46. 2. τοῖς μὲν πλήθεσιν, the 
common people (cf. τῶν πολλῶν, § 45°) 
in various states: cf. τῶν μὲν... τῶν δὲ in 
ὃ 45°%. 

3, 4. ἀπολωλεκέναι (M.T. 109): 1.6. 
the result has been that they Aave Jost 
their liberty; the idea of the perfect in 
the next clause appears more naturally in 
πεπρακόσιν than in αἰσθέσθαι, to find out 
that they have sold themselves first (M.T. 
9094). For the case of πεπρακόσιν see Ὁ. 
9281. 

7. ἀκούουσιν, audiunt, they hear them- 
selves called: cf. Hor. Ep. 1. 16, 17, si 


~curas esse quod audis. 


8 47. 3. ἐπειδὰν... γένηται, after he 
has become master of what he has bought : 


40 ‘ae AHMOZOENOY> 


/ ΄, WE sail a. al 4 Ἂ ἠδὲ μ x 
προδότῃ συμβούλῳ περὶ τῶν λοιπῶν ETL χρῆται" οὐδὲν γὰρ av 
5 ἣν εὐδαιμονέστερον προδότου. GAN οὐκ ἔστι ταῦτα" πόθεν; 

κι \ “ 9 2. 9 Ν la / 3 Ν 
πολλοῦ γε καὶ δεῖ. ἀλλ᾽ ἐπειδὰν τῶν πραγμάτων ἐγκρατὴς 
ὁ ζητῶν ἄρχειν καταστῇ, καὶ τῶν ταῦτα ἀποδομένων δε- 
\ A 
σπότης ἐστὶ, τὴν δὲ πονηρίαν εἰδὼς τότε δὴ, τότε καὶ μισεῖ 
A na a 3 
48 καὶ ἀπιστεῖ καὶ προπηλακίζει. σκοπεῖτε δέ: καὶ γὰρ εἰ 
ἴω “ ‘\ 
παρελήλυθεν ὁ τῶν πραγμάτων καιρὸς, ὁ τοῦ γ᾽ εἰδέναι τὰ 

ἴω A > la / 
τοιαῦτα καιρὸς GEL πάρεστι τοῖς EV φρονοῦσι. μέχρι τούτου 
Λασθένης φίλος ὠνομάζετο, ἕως προύδωκεν ᾿Ολυνθον: μέχρι 
δ ¥ 

5 τούτου Τιμόλας, ἕως ἀπώλεσε Θήβας: μέχρι τούτου Εύδικος 


ἴω ἴω y 7 / 
καὶ Σῖμος ὁ Λαρισαῖος, ἕως Θετταλίαν ὑπὸ Φιλίππῳ ἐποίη- 


5. ἣν ΣΙ; av Ὧν L, vulg. 


μένων A2; ἀποδιδομ. Y. 8. 
§ 48. 1. 6% (for dé) At. 4: 
Φιλίππου L, vulg. 5. 


later Tov over Tou >. 6. 
Λαρισσ. 1,3, vulg. 


the rel. past time comes entirely from the 
force of ἐπειδάν, postguam (M.T. go). 
For the assimilation of ὧν ἂν πρίηται, 
which really conditions κύριος γένηται, 
see. M.T. 563: in: such a.-dependent 
general condition the indic. also is al- 
lowed. 

4. οὐδὲν... προδότου, for (otherwise) 
nothing would be happier than a traitor. 
To omit ἄν here (with = and a few other 
MSs.) would be against all usage: in XXI. 
120, οὐ yap ἦν βιωτόν, cited by Vomel, 
there is a potential force in ἦν βιωτόν, 
7 could not have lived. 

5. πόθεν;.. δεῖ: cf. §§ 521, 1408, and 
πῶς yap; ὃ 3128, 

7. Kal, also, with τῶν ἀποδομένων. 

ὃ 48. 3. μέχρι τούτου with ἕως, 
twice repeated. West. refers to a similar 
ἀναφορά of πολλά in ἃ 8115, of οὐχ 6 in 
§ 250%19, and of οὐκ in § 3221-4. Ex- 
pressions like this show the relative 
character of ἕως and other particles mean- 
ing ztil. (M.T. 611, 612.) 

4. «Λασθένης: Lasthenes and Euthy- 
crates are often mentioned as traitors 
who betrayed Olynthus to Philip: see 


εὐτυχέστερον Bi. 
ἔστιν repeated after ταῦτα vulg. (cf. § 52). 

τότε μισεῖ AT. . 
φίλος ὠνομάζετο X, Y; Φιλίππῳ added = (yp), 
Τιμόλαος MSS.; see ὃ 295". 


οὐκ ἔστιν ταῦτα Σ, A2; οὐκ 


πόθεν ; om. Β. 7. ἀποδεδο- 


τούτου (bef. Εὖδ.) L, vulg. ; 


ὁ Λαρισαῖος 2; of Λαρισαῖοι B, At; ὁ Λαρισσαῖος L; οἱ 


VIII. 40; IX. 66; XIX. 265) 342; Diod. 
XVI. 53. Cf. Plut] ΜΙ ΟΡ τ esses 
δὲ περὶ Λασθένην τὸν ᾿Ολύνθιον éyxa- 
Χούντων καὶ ἀγανακτούντων ὅτι προδότας 
αὐτοὺς ἔνιοι τῶν περὶ τὸν Φίλιππον ἀπο- 
καλοῦσι, σκαιοὺς ἔφη (sc. Φίλιππος) φύσει 
καὶ ἀγροίκους εἶναι Μακεδόνας καὶ τὴν 
σκαφὴν σκαφὴν λέγοντας, i.e. they called 
a Spade a spade. 

5. Τιμόλας : Timolaus was a Theban, 
who was probably active in causing the 
surrender of Thebes to Philip after Chae- 
ronea. Dinarchus (Dem. 74) calls him 
a friend of Demosthenes ! Theopompus 
(Athen. x. 4368) calls him the greatest 
voluptuary who was ever engaged in 
state affairs. See note on § 295°, with 
the quotation from Polybius. 

6. Σῖμος: Simus (acc. to Haran 
belonged to the Thessalian house of the 
Aleuadae at Larissa, who called in Philip 
against the tyrants of Pherae in 352 B.C. 
with the usual result (Diod. XVI. 14 and © 
35). See Hist. § 6.—é Aaptoatos (so 
=, L) belongs only to Stuos, who is called 
a Larissaean in [LIX.] 108, and ὁ Θετταλός 
in 24. Aristotle (Pol. virt. (v.) 6, 13), 


242 


ψν 
“ἢ 
7 5 : 


“ 


ΠΕΡΙ TOY ΣΤΕΦΑΝΟΥ | 41 


σαν. 


ον .ὃ ΄, τ τ ΄ὕ \ , \ SW 
Εἰ ἐλαυνομένων και ὑβριζομένων καὶ τι Κακον ουχυ 


/ “A ¢ > 4 \ / ΄ bag id 
Pte ι- 
πασχόντων πᾶσα ἡ οἰκουμένη μεστὴ γέγονεν. τί δ᾽ "Ap 
3 


στρατος ἐν Σικυῶνι, καὶ τί Πέριλλος ἐν Μεγάροις; οὐκ 


9 ΄ὕ 3 = uN / 3 »” + Ψ ε , 
απερριμμενοιυ; ἐξ ων και σαφέστατ αν τις ἴδοι OTL O μα- 


λιστα φυλάττων τὴν ἑαυτοῦ πατρίδα καὶ πλεῖστ᾽ ἀντιλέγων 


, ae co A > ΄, A A \ 
TOUTOLS, OVUTOS υμιν, Αἰσχίνη, τοις προδιδοῦσι και μισθαρ- 


lan ᾿, » νι. o ͵ ἴω Ν Ν Ν 
VOUOL TO EX EW ἐφ ΟΤῳ δωροδοκήσετε TT EPLTTOLEL, και διὰ τους 


x Ν 4 XN > la ~ ε la 
πολλοὺς τουτωνὶ Kal τοὺς ἀνθισταμένους τοῖς ὑμετέροις 


βο Ν la Ξε A 3 ial ΕΣ. ὦ θ 5 Ν ὃ / ε la 
υλημασιν υμεις ἐστε σῳοι και εἐμμισῦοι, ETEL OLA YE VULAS 


αὐτοὺς πάλαι ἂν ἀπωλώλειτε. 


Se 


; Ν \ \ a , , » » \ 
Και περὶ μὲν τῶν τότε πραχθέντων ἔχων ETL πολλὰ 


λέγειν, καὶ ταῦτα ἡγοῦμαι πλείω τῶν ἱκανῶν εἰρῆσθαι. 


» 3 a ν ε ΄ ΄, la ΄, 
αιτιος ὃ ουτος, WOTEP ἐἑωλοκρασίαν τινα μου Τῆς TOVYPLas 


7. καὶ ὑβριζ. om. A2. 


8. γέγονεν Σ; γέγονε προδοτῶν = (yp), L, vulg. 


9. Πέριλλος Phot., Harp., Suid.; Ilepitaos Σ, L, vulg. (see Vom. and ὃ 2957”). 


§ 49. 1. 6above line Σ. 3. qui At. ὦ Αἰσχίνη O. 5. TOv- 
τωνὶ 2, L, Az; τούτων vulg. τοις ἀνθισταμένοις Σ᾽ (each o changed to ov), 
ΠΕΣ ἘΣ 6, 7. vpas αὑτοὺς >. 7. ἀπολώλειτε Σ, vulg.; ἀπωλώλειτε L, 
Bekk. An. p. 126, 33. 

ὃ 50. 3. οὑτοσὶ B. 
after speaking of two factions calling in § 49. 4. τὸ ἔχειν... περιποιεῖ, secures 


mercenaries, and an arbiter who some- 
times gets the mastery of both, adds: 
ὅπερ συνέβη ἐν Λαρίσῃ ἐπὶ τῆς τῶν ᾿Αλευα- 
δῶν ἀρχῆς τῶν περὶ Σῖμον. Eudicus is not 
otherwise known. 

7. τί κακὸν οὐχὶ πασχόντων; = οὐδὲν 
κακὸν οὐχὶ (1.6. πάντα κακὰ) πασχόντων. 
προδοτῶν follows γέγονε in all Mss. but Σ: 
it is easily understood. 

8. πᾶσα ἡ οἰκουμένη is properly the 


whole habitable world, i.e. the Greek 


world; asin Ev. Luc. ii. 1 it is the whole 
Roman world. But here it is merely a 


‘loose expression with no special limit. 
_ We should say, ‘“‘all the world is full of 
_ these wretches.”—Aptotparos, a tyrant 
of Sicyon: see the account of his portrait 


by Melanthus and Apelles, destroyed by 
order of Aratus, in Plut. Arat. 13. 

g. IléptAdos, of Megara: see XIX. 
295. Perillus and Aristratus are in the 
*black-list”’ of Cor. § 295. For Philip’s 


intrigues in Megara see Grote XI. 613, 621. 


See Hist. § 52 (end). 


for you your opportunities for being bribed 
(the wherewithal to be bribed). 

6. ἐστε σῷοι Kal ἔμμισθοι, 1.6. you 
survive to be σεγαὶ.---διὰ.. αὐτοὺς, 7f you 
were left to yourselves (M.T. 472). The 
orator surprises his audience by this 
original reason why the Athenian traitors 
have been saved from the fate of traitors 
in other states, i.e. the honest citizens 
thwart their schemes and thus save them 
from the ruin of success. This brilliant 
attack is followed up sharply in what 
follows. 

δὲ 50—52: the peroration to the 
argument on the Peace of Philocrates. 

§ 50. τ. τῶν τότε πραχθέντων, 1.6. 
the transactions concerning the peace. 
The suggestion in the first sentence that 
he will drop this subject makes this sud- 
den recurrence to the charge of venality 
all the more effective. 

3. αὕτιος, i.e. of my speaking πλείω 
τῶν ixavav.—ormep, as it were (M.T. 867), 
with ἑωλοκρασίαν, not with κατασκεδάσας. 


SS ee 


— 1 τὦ 


ταν 


— 


ee 


42 


“ ww a aA Aw 4 
τῆς ἑαυτοῦ καὶ TOV ἀδικημάτων  κατασκεδάσας, ἣν ἀναγκαῖον 


ΔΗΛΛΟΣΘΕΝΟΥΣ 


5ἦν πρὸς τοὺς νεωτέρους τῶν πεπραγμένων ἀπολύσασθαι. 


/ ay ε Ν \ $ XX > lal ε lal io / 
παρηνώχλησθε δ᾽ tows οἱ καὶ πριν ἐμε εἰπειν οτιουν ELOOTES 


Ν id 
51 τὴν τούτου τότε μισθαρνίαν. 


καίτοι φιλίαν γε καὶ ξενίαν 


ὅκως > , \ - > + ΄ ε N 9 ὕ 
αὐτὴν ὀνομάζει, καὶ νῦν εἶπέ που ppb ὁ τὴν ᾿Αλεξάν- 


dpov ξενίαν ὀνειδίζων ἐμοί. ͵ 


ἐγώ σοι ξενίαν ᾿Αλεξάν- 


ὅρου; πόθεν λαβόντι ἢ πῶς ἀξιωθέντι; οὔτε Φιλίππου ξένον 


5 OUT ᾿Αλεξάνδρου φίλον εἴποιμ᾽ ἂν ἐγώ σε, οὐχ οὕτω μαΐί- 


5 Ν Ν Ν Ν Ν \ » ΜᾺ 
νομαι, εἰ μὴ καὶ τοὺς θεριστὰς καὶ τοὺς ἄλλο τι μισθοῦ 


» / \ 4 Loe la) la re 
πράττοντας φίλους καὶ ξένους δεῖ καλεῖν TOV μισθωσαμένων. 


52 ἀλλ᾽ οὐκ ἔστι ταῦτα: πόθεν; πολλοῦ γε καὶ δεῖ. 


4. καὶ τῶν ἀδικημάτων MSS.; om. Hermog., Harp., Zonar., 


ahha 


Suid.; in [] West., 


Lips. 6. παρηνωχλῆησθαι Σ. δὲ ἴσως Σ,1.} : δ᾽ ὑμεῖς pak Ar; δὲ καὶ ὑμεῖς 
ἴσως L?, B, vulg. εἰπεῖν ὁτιοῦν Σ, L, Αἵ ; ὁτ. εἰπ. 'B, vulg. 7. τότε τὴν Ὁ. 
§ 521. 1. ye 2, Τ᾿ .B,Ar..23 re-vulg. 2. καὶ εἰ νῦν A2. 2. φιλίαν 
ὀνειδίζων V 6. 
§ 52. 1. οὐκ ἔστι repeated after ταῦτα Ar (see ὃ 47°). 


—twhokpactav, a mixture of stale dregs, 
lit. a mixture of the refuse (esp. heel-taps) 
of last night's feast (Ewra, hesterna). The 
Scholia say: ὃ χθὲς καὶ πρῴην éxépace 
πρᾶγμα τήμερόν μου καταχέει, καὶ ἐμὲ 
πρᾶξαί φησι τὰ κακῶς αὑτῷ οἰκονομηθέντα. 
So Didymus, quoted by Harpocr. See 
Bekk. An. p. 258: ἡ κατάχυσις τῶν ζω- 
μῶν τῶν ἑώλων δείπνων ἐπὶ τοὺς κοιμω- 
μένους τῶν συμπινόντων. λαμβάνεται δὲ 
καὶ ἐπὶ τῇ κατηγορίᾳ ἀρχαίων πραγμάτων. 
This burst of indignation refers especially 
to the audacious conduct of Aeschines 
(57) in charging Demosthenes with the 
same cooperation with Philocrates in 
making the peace which he had once 
claimed for himself as a merit (I. 174). 
See § 17° (above). Demosthenes calls 
this treatment ‘‘deluging me with the 
stale refuse of his own villainy.” In 
XXI. 112 old offences are spoken of as 
τἀδικήμαθ᾽ ἕωλα καὶ ψυχρά. For éwdo- 
κρασία, see Plut. Mor. p. 148A, ἐνίοις εἰς 
ἅπαντα Tov βίον ἐμμένει TO πρὸς ἀλλήλους 
δυσάρεστον, ὥσπερ ἑωλοκρασία τις ὕβρεως 
ἢ ὀργῆς ἐν οἴνῳ γενομένης, and Lucian, 
Conv. 3, πολλὴν τὴν ἑωλοκρασίαν κατα- 
σκεδάσας ἀνδρῶν φιλοσόφων. 


4. West. brackets καὶ τῶν ἀδικημάτων : 
see critical note. 

5. νεωτέρους: the youngest judges 
present might have been only fourteen 
years old in 346 Β.6.--ὠἀὀπολύσασθαι, Zo 
clear myself of: there is no need of 
the emendation ἀπολούσασθαι or ἀποκλύ- 
σασθαι. See Thue. Vill. 87, by eal 
πρὸς αὐτοὺς Tas διαβολάς. 

6. παρηνώχλησθε: addressed to the 
older judges (cf. ἐνοχλεῖ, ὃ 45). 


§ 51. τ. φιλίαν, ξενίαν, properly friend- ᾿ 


ship and guest-friendship. here seem. to 
be used with little thought of the dis- 
tinction. Cf. ξενίαν ᾿Αλεξάνδρου (3) and 
οὔτε Bid. ξένον οὔτε Ades. φίλον (below). 
See Vomel’s notes. 

2. εἶπε λέγων : cf. εἶπε φωνῶν, Aeschyl- 
Ag. 205, ‘‘spake, saying. 

3. ὀνειδίζων: Aesch. had said (66), ὁ 
τὴν ξενίαν ἐμοὶ προφέρων τὴν ᾿Αλεξ- 
ἀνδρου. 

4. πόθεν... ἀξιωθέντι; with dramatic 
energy for πόθεν... 


ef. § 1283. 


6. θεριστὰς, reapers, properly extra 
Jarm-hands, called in at the harvest 
{81}: 


«ἔλαβες ἢ πῶς ἠξιώθης; 


ΟῚ 
᾿ 


| 


Ὑ 


καλῶ, καὶ οὗτοι πάντες. 
ele δ᾽ ἐγὼ τοῦθ᾽ ὑπὲρ σοῦ ποιήσω. 
243 ὦ ἄνδρες ᾿Αθηναῖοι, δοκεῖ μισθωτὸς Αἰσχίνης ἢ ξένος εἶναι - 


ΠΕΡΙ 


TOY ΣΤΕΦΑΝΟΥ 43 


μισθωτὸν ἐγώ σε Φιλίππου πρότερον καὶ νῦν ᾿Αλεξάνδρου 
εἰ δ᾽ ἀπιστεῖς, ἐρώτησον αὐτούς" 


/ aa 
more pup ὑμῖν, 


᾿Αλεξάνδρου; ἀκούεις ἃ λέγουσι, — 


Βούλομαι τοίνυν ἤδη καὶ περὶ τῆς γραφῆς. αὐτῆς ἀπο- 58 
λογήσασθαι καὶ διεξελθεῖν τὰ TET Pay HEY ἐμαυτῷ, 


Y 
να 


καίπερ εἰδὼς Αἰσχίνης ὅμως ἀκούσῃ du a φημι καὶ τούτων 


τῶν προβεβουλευμένων καὶ 

δωρεῶν δίκαιος εἶναι τυγχάνειν. 
ΗΝ 4 

αὐτὴν λαβών. 


πολλῷ μειζόνων ἔτι τούτων 


καί μοι λέγε τὴν γραφὴν 5 


ΓΡΑΦΗ. 


[Επὶ Χαιρώνδου ἄρχοντος, ἐλαφηβολιῶνος ἕκτη ἱσταμένου, 
Αἰσχίνης. ᾿Ατρομήτου Κοθωκίδης ἀπήνεγκε πρὸς τὸν ἄρχοντα 


4 lal a 
παρανόμων κατὰ Κτησιφῶντος τοῦ Λεωσθένους ᾿Αναφλυστίου, 


2. πρότερον Pir. At. ἢ νῦν V6. 4. πρότερον (1st p erased) >. ἘΠῚ 70} 
om. F, O, V6. μισθωτὸς B, V6 (L, Ar): so Vomel; μίσθωτος most Mss., = 
(changed from -rés). 

8 53. 1. ἤδη 0m. At. 4. τῶν over erased και LI. πολλῶν F, Φ. 
5. δίκαιον Ο. αὐτὴν 2, L}, vulg.; ταύτην L?, At. 

852. 3. οὗτοι πάντες probably included safe for him to put this question boldly, 


both court and audience. 

5. μισθωτὸς: most Mss. (= only by 
correction) read μίσθωτος, following the 
absurd story of Ulpian (see Schol.), that 
Demosth. pronounced this word μίσθωτος 
to make the judges correct his accent by 


shouting out the very word μισθωτός which 


he wanted to hear. It is much more 
likely—indeed, it is certain—that he saw 
by the faces of his hearers that it was 


§§ 53—125. Having finished his 
reply to the charges foreign to the indict- 
ment, he now proceeds to the indictment 
‘itself. We have (1) an introduction 
(88 5359), (2) a discussion of his public 
life (§§ 60—109), (3)a reply to the charge 
that the orator was ὑπεύθυνος when it was 
proposed to crown him (§§ 110—119), 


(4) a defence of the proposal to crown 


him in the theatre (88 120, 121), and (5) a 
_ conclusion (§§ 122—125). 
§§ 53—59. Introduction, including 


and he was probably greeted by an over- 
whelming shout of μισθωτός, μισθωτός, 
from both court and audience. The 
judges, more than four-fifths of whom 
voted in a few hours to acquit Ctesiphon 
and to condemn Aeschines to a fine and 
ἀτιμία, were by this time ready to re- 
spond to such a sudden appeal, after 
listening to this most conclusive argu- 
ment with its brilliant close. 


the reading of the indictment. 

$53. 4. τῶν προβεβουλευμένων (pass.), 
strictly accurate for the provisions of the 
προβούλευμα of Ctesiphon, which had 
passed only the Senate. The correspond- 
ing phrase for the items of a ψήφισμα 
would be τῶν ἐψηφισμένων. Cf. τῶν 
γεγραμμένων, ὃ 564. 

5. δίκαιος εἶναι, that J deserve: 
sonal use of δίκαιος (Μ. Τ. 762). 

δὲ 54, 55. This spurious document 
once passed for the ‘‘ single undoubtedly 


per- 


44 ΔΗΛΛΟΣΘΕΝΟΥΣ 


5 ὅτι ἔγραψε παράνομον ψήφισμα, ὡς ἄρα δεῖ στεφανῶσαι Δη- 
μοσθένην Δημοσθένους Παιανιέα χρυσῷ στεφάνῳ, καὶ ἀναγο- 
ρεῦσαι ἐν τῷ θεάτρῳ Διονυσίοις τοῖς μεγάλοις, τραγῳδοῖς καινοῖς, 
ὅτι στεφανοῖ ὁ δῆμος Δημοσθένην Δημοσθένους Παιανιέα χρυσῷ 
στεφάνῳ ἀρετῆς ἕνεκα, καὶ εὐνοίας ἧς ἔχων διατελεῖ εἴς τε τοὺς 

10”EAAnvas ἅπαντας καὶ τὸν δῆμον τὸν ᾿Αθηναίων, καὶ ἀνδραγαθίας, 
καὶ διότι διατελεῖ πράττων καὶ λέγων τὰ βέλτιστα τῷ δήμῳ καὶ 

55 πρόθυμός ἐστι ποιεῖν ὅ τι ἂν δύνηται ἀγαθὸν, πάντα ταῦτα ψευδῆ 
γράψας καὶ παράνομα, τῶν νόμων οὐκ ἐώντων πρῶτον μὲν ψευδεῖς 
γραφὰς εἰς τὰ δημόσια γράμματα καταβάλλεσθαι, εἶτα τὸν ὑπεύ- 
θυνον στεφανοῦν (ἔστι δὲ Δημοσθένης τειχοποιὸς καὶ ἐπὶ τῷ 

5 θεωρικῷ τεταγμένος), ἔτι δὲ μὴ ἀναγορεύειν τὸν στέφανον ἐν τῷ 
θεάτρῳ Διονυσίοις τραγῳδῶν τῇ καινῇ, ἀλλ᾽ ἐὰν μὲν ἡ βουλὴ 
στεφανοῖ, ἐν τῷ βουλευτηρίῳ ἀνειπεῖν, ἐὰν δὲ ἡ πόλις, ἐν Πυκνὶ ἐν 
τῇ ἐκκλησίᾳ. τίμημα τάλαντα πεντήκοντα. κλητῆρες Κηφισοφῶν 
Κηφισοφῶντος 'Ῥαμνούσιος, Κλέων Κλέωνος Κοθωκίδης.] 


ra ΄ὰ ἢ > 5» 3 A 

56 «=A μὲν διώκει τοῦ ψηφίσματος, ὦ ἄνδρες ᾿Αθηναῖοι, 
ἴω “A lal > ; ~ 

ταῦτ᾽ ἐστιν. ἐγὼ δ᾽ am αὐτῶν τούτων πρῶτον οἶμαι δῆλον 


nA ν ν 5 , : \ Ἂν 
ὑμῖν ποιήσειν ὅτι πάντα δικαίως ἀπολογήσομαι" τὴν γὰρ 


8 56. 1. οἴομαι erased in = before διώκει. 2. οἴομαι Ar, vulg. 


genuine Athenian indictment.” Chaeron- 
das was archon in 338—337 B.Cc.; but 
the indictment was brought in the spring 
of 336. The γραφὴ παρανόμων came be- 
fore the θεσμοθέται, not before the Chief 
Archon. 

The expression τραγῳδοῖς καινοῖς, ὃ 547, 
on the day of the new tragedians, i.e. 
when new tragedies were performed, is 
confirmed by τοῖς τραγῳδοῖς, Aesch. III. 
45, τραγῳδῶν γιγνομένων καινῶν, 34, and 
τραγῳδοῖς ἐν τῷ θεάτρῳ, 36. In § 55° 
τραγῳδῶν τῇ καινῇ is doubtful and per- 
haps corrupt: there is another reading, 
τραγῳδῶν καινῶν (sc. ἀγωνιζομένων). But 
with τῇ καινῇ we might perhaps under- 
stand εἰσόδῳ with Wolf, or ἀγωνίᾳ with 
others. Boeckh, Corp. Ins. Gr. It. p. 
459, gives a decree of Calymna with 
κυκλίων τῇ πρώτῃ (sc. παρόδῳ or εἰσόδῳ). 
In (.1. Att. 11. No. 331 is τραγῳδῶν τῷ 
ἀγῶνι τῷ καινῷ, and in Nos. 300 and 311 


τραγῳδῶν τῷ ἀγῶνι. 

See note on the spurious προβούλευμα, 
of Ctesiphon in § 118. i 

8.56. 1. “A μὲν διώκει: the passages of 
the decree quoted in the indictment are 
all that are accused of illegality. 

3. πάντα δικαίως ἀπολογήσομαι: 
this is a sarcastic allusion to the demand 
of Aesch. (202) that the court compel 
Demosth., if he is allowed to speak at 
all, to follow his opponent’s order of 
argument: ἀξιώσατε τὸν Δημοσθένην τὸν 
αὐτὸν ἡρόπον ἀπολογεῖσθαι ὅνπερ κἀγὼ 
κατηγόρηκα. See note on § 28 It so” 
happens that Aesch. has stated the 
charges in the indictment in the order in 
which Demosth. wishes to reply to them, — 
just the order which Aesch. is anxious 
to prevent him from following: in his 
speech he has followed an entirely differ- 


ent order. See Essay 1. ὃ 4. 
x 


ΠΈΡΙ TOY STEANOY 45 


SX Set , a 
αὐτὴν τούτῳ ποιησάμενος τῶν γεγραμμένων τάξιν, περὶ 


πάντων ἐρῶ καθ᾽ ἕκαστον ἐφεξῆς καὶ οὐδὲν ἑκὼν παραλείψω. 5 
A \ a / Ν 4 \ , , 

τοῦ μὲν οὖν γράψαι. πράττοντα καὶ λέγοντα τὰ βέλτιστά με 57 

τῷ δήμῳ διατελεῖν καὶ πρόθυμον εἶναι ποιεῖν ὅ τι δύναμαι. 


3 x Ν δὴ Ἂς A 

ἀγαθὸν, καὶλέπαινεῖν ἐπὶ τούτοις, ἐν τοῖς πεπολιτευμένοις τὴν 
΄ > , Τ΄ 

κρίσιν εἶναι νομίζω" ἀπὸ γὰρ τούτων ἐξεταζομένων εὑρεθή- 


σεται εἴτ᾽ ἀληθῆ περὶ ἐμοῦ οοαν Κτησιφῶν ταῦτα καὶ 5 
τὸ δὲ μὴ προσγράψαντα 58 


Γ » os “A 
προσήκοντα εἴτε καὶ ψευδῆ: 
sre | ὃ Ν Ν 3 ’ὔ ~ ~ \ > A 5 “ 
ἐπειδὰν τὰς εὐθύνας δῷ στεφανοῦν καὶ ἀνειπεῖν ἐν τῷ 
, ᾿ς 4 “wn ~ »-- 
θεάτρῳ τὸν στέφανον κελεῦσαι, κοινωνεῖν μὲν ἡγοῦμαι 
Ν La) ~ YF We “ 
καὶ τοῦτο τοῖς πεπολιτευμένοις, ELT ἀξιός εἰμι τοῦ στεφάνου 


§ 57. 1. τὸ (for τοῦ) Ar. 
πράττοντά xe vulg. ; λέγοντά με At. 
δύνωμαι vulg. 4: 


§ 58. 3. 


4. εἰμὶ ἄξιος Y. τοῦ om. V6, 


γράψαι om. Ar. 


eivai μοι 1,5, Ar. 
Kr. γέγραφε ταῦτα περὶ ἐμοῦ (so Vim.) V6. 
Tov στέφανον κελεῦσαι XZ, L, Ar, Y; xed. τὸν στέφανον B, vulg. 


Bév\riord we D, L, B, F, O; 

ὅ τι δύναμαι Σ, Li (1,2 6 τι ἄν); ὅ τι ἂν 

εὑρήσετε At, 1,2 (yp). 5. εἴτε 
6. εἴτε ψευδῆ Ο. 


“Se 

4. τῶν γεγραμμένων (pass.), of the 

items of the indictment: cf. § 534. γέγραμ- 
μαι anid ἐγράφην may be used as passives 
of both γράφω, propose (a bill), and γρά- 
gout, indict: see δικαίως γεγραμμένα, 
XXIII. 101, ᾧ γέγραπται, ibid. 18; τὰ 
γραφέντα, the proposed measures, Cor. 
8 864; οὐδὲ γραφέντα, not even indicted, 
8 2227. But γέγραμμαι is generally 
middle (seldom passive) of γράφομαι, 77:- 
dict; as below, ὃ 592, γεγραμμένος ταῦτα: 
cf. γέγραψαι, § 119}. 
5. Kad’ ἕκαστον ἐφεξῆς : by taking up 
each point in the order of the indictment, 
he will ensure completeness in his de- 
fence. The same sarcasm is kept up. — 

ὃ 57. τ. τοῦ γράψαι.. καὶ ἐπαινεῖν (sc. 
Κτησιφῶντα) depends on τὴν κρίσιν (4). 
πράττοντα...ἀγαθὸν (1—3) is in substance 
quoted from the decree: cf. 88 59%, 86°, 
888, Aesch. (III. 49) professes to quote 
the exact words, ὅτι διατελεῖ καὶ λέγων 
καὶ πράττων τὰ ἄῤιστα τῷ δήμῳ: cf. other 
references in Aesch. 101, 237. 

3. ἐπαινεῖν: see ὃ 113° and note. 

5. ἀληθῆ, προσήκοντα, and Wevdy (6) 
are predicates to ταῦτα. 

6. εἴτε kal ψευδῆ : καὶ expresses paral- 


δ, 


lelism with ἀληθῆ : cf. εἴτε καὶ μή, § 585. 
See note on καί before διεκωλύθη ὃ 60%. 

§ 58. 1. τὸ... κελεῦσαι (3), the bidding 
me (in his decree) to be crowned...and the 
crown to be proclaimed in the theatre 
(στεφανοῦν and ἀνειπεῖν in the usual 
active form): this clause is repeated in 
τοῦτο as subject of xowwvety.—py προσ- 
γράψαντα... δῷ: Aesch. makes it a 
special act of shamelessness in Ctesiphon 
(see 11, 12) to omit this saving clause. 
It was frequently added in such decrees: 
see C. I. Att. 11. Nos. 114 (343 B.C.), 
στεφανῶσαι χρυσῷ στεφάνῳ ἀπὸ x. Spax- 
μῶν ἐπειδὰν τὰς εὐθύνας δῷ, and 190. 
This proviso, according to Aesch. (12), 
did not make the decree legal, though 
it showed a sense of shame in the 
mover. 

3. κοινωγεῖν.. .πεπολιτευμένοις, elt’... 
καὶ μή (5), lit. 2 thik this too ts concerned 
with my public acts (namely with the 
question) whether 7 deserve the crown etc. 
or not. The loose relation of εἴτ᾽ ἄξιός 
εἰμι K.T.A. to τοῖς πεπολιτευμένοις, Which 
it explains, is permissible after the full 
form in ὃ 575 δ; without this it would be 
obscure. 


Ὡ Ὁ 


Mere. “Gee eee oe eT “νς 
a ae ght ate eiane Mens 


aS Ὅδι ἐμᾷ 


ΣΝ 


πε, ἀφο. 
NT ee a greta 
ν ae 


I gence 
τςς 


τς eee 


a 


46 | AHMOSOENOYS 


‘LL TM an » + 4a ΑΘ 
5 καὶ τῆς ἀναρρήσεως τῆς ἐν τούτοις ELTE καὶ μή" ETL μέντοι 


> , 7 > a ἊΝ 
καὶ τοὺς νόμους δεικτέον εἶναί μοι δοκεῖ καθ᾽ ovs ταῦτα 


’, 3 ἴω 7 
γράφειν ἐξῆν τούτῳ. 


οὑτωσὶ μὲν, ὦ ἄνδρες ᾿Αθηναῖοι, δι- 


καίως καὶ ἁπλῶς τὴν ἀπολογίαν ἔγνωκα ποιεῖσθαι, βαδιοῦ- 


3 > d ΄ ΄-- 2 ε ΄ὔ 
59 μαι δ᾽ ἐπ᾽ αὐτὰ ἃ πέπρακταί μοι.᾿ (Kal με μηδεὶς ὑπολάβῃ 


A A AO pp aa ε Ν , 
ἀπαρτᾶν Tov λόγον τῆς γραφῆς, ἐὰν els Ἑλληνικὰς πράξεις 
\ / 3 v4 ε Ν ὃ , ἴω ᾽ὔ ὺς λέ 
καὶ λόγους ἐμπέσω:" ὁ γὰρ διώκων τοῦ ψηφίσματος τὸ λέγειν 

ϑι ἴω. ε > ; 
καὶ πράττειν τὰ ἄριστά με καὶ γεγραμμένος ταῦτα ὡς OUK 2 


A a \ , la 3 \ 
5 ἀληθῆ, οὗτός ἐστιν 6 τοὺς περὶ ἁπάντων TOV ἐμοὶ πεπολιτευ- 


μένων λόγους οἰκείους καὶ ἀναγκαίους τῇ γραφῇ πεποιηκώς. 
εἶτα καὶ πολλῶν προαιρέσεων οὐσῶν τῆς πολιτείας τὴν περὶ 
τὰς Ἑλληνικὰς πράξεις εἱλόμην ἐγὼ, ὥστε καὶ τὰς ἀποδείξεις 
ἐκ τούτων δίκαιός εἰμι ποιεῖσθαι. 

“A μὲν οὖν πρὸ τοῦ πολιτεύεσθαι καὶ δημηγορεῖν ἐμὲ 


5. τῆς ἐν τούτοις om. Y, Φᾧ (yp); THs ἐν om. B. 


8. ποιεῖσθε Σ. 


§ 59. 1. μοι (for με) Ο. 5. πάντων At. 
7. “καὶ οἷ. V6. 


πεπολ. καὶ πεπραγμένων Ar, B, vulg. 


καὶ (bef. μή) om. Ar, Y, ® (yp)- 7 


πεπολιτευμένων Σ, 1.1, 4.2, O1;. 


5. ἐν τούτοις: i.e. before the people 
(in the theatre). 

6. τοὺς νόμους: the arguments are 
given in §§ 110—121. 

8 59. 2. “EdAnvixds...Adyous, 1.6. ὦ 
discussion of our foreign policy, i.e. our 
relations to other Greek states. Athens 
could not be said to have a ‘‘policy” 
with barbarians, though her relations to 
them could be expressed by ξενικά: see 
note on οἰκείων, Ελληνικῶν, and ξενικῶν, 
§ 311%. Demosthenes selected foreign 
affairs as his special department: see 
§ 62°. 

3. τοῦ Ψψηφίσματος, depending on τὸ 
λέγειν...με, 1.6. the clause declaring etc. 

4. γεγραμμένος (middle): see note on 
§ 564. 

7. προαιρέσεων τῆς πολιτείας, depart- 
ments of the government (open to choice). 


§§ 60—109. In this general defence of 
his public policy, (1) he defends his fixed 
principle of opposition to Philip’s aggres- 


sions (§§ 60—72); (2) he speaks of the 

events which immediately preceded the 
outbreak of war with Philip in 340 B.C. 
(§§ 73—101), avoiding all mention of the — 
later Amphissian war and the other 
events which led to the battle of Chaero- 

nea; (3) he defends his trierarchic law 
(§§ 102—109). Vis a 

See Fox’s elaborate analysis of this 
argument, Kranzrede, pp. 86—108. 

8 60. 1. πρὸ τοῦ πολιτεύεσθαι: the 
public life of Demosth. properly began 
with his speech on the Symmories in — 
354 B.C. (see Hist. § 11); but his re- 
sponsibility for the foreign policy of 
Athens began after the peace of 346. 
Still, his fixed policy of opposing Philip, 
though unsuccessful at first, goes back at 
least to the\First Philippic in 351; and 
he is here (§§ 60—72) defending generally — 
his public life as a whole, seldom men- — 
tioning his special acts. He reserves 
these for a later part of his argument 
($$ 79—94, and after ὃ 159). 


' 


ΠΕΡῚ TOY STEDANOY 47 


mpovhaBe καὶ κατέσχε Φίλιππος, ἐάσω: οὐδὲν yap ἡγοῦμαι 
τούτων εἶναι πρὸς ἐμέ: δ᾽ ἀφ᾽ ἧς ἡμέρας ἐπὶ ταῦτα 
ἐπέστην ἐγὼ καὶ διεκωλύθη, ταῦτα ἀναμνήσω καὶ τούτων 
ὑφέξω λόγον, τοσοῦτον ὑπειπών. 


9 Ν 5 > ν ε 4 \ nw Ν 
οὐ τισὶν, ἀλλ᾽ ἅπασιν ὁμοίως, φορὰν προδοτῶν καὶ δωρο- 
, \ “Ὁ 5 “~ 5 »Ἁ ,ὔὕ = ’ 
δόκων καὶ θεοῖς ἐχθρῶν ἀνθρώπων συνέβη γενέσθαι τοσαύτην 
ὅσην οὐδείς πω πρότερον μέμνηται γεγονυῖαν: ovs συναγω- 
νιστὰς καὶ συνεργοὺς λαβὼν καὶ πρότερον κακῶς τοὺς 
ν ων aA 
EdAnvas ἔχοντας πρὸς ἑαυτοὺς καὶ στασιαστικῶς ETL χεῖρον 
4 \ \ > ~ -~ \ \ \ A ’ὔ’ 
διέθηκε, τοὺς μὲν ἐξαπατῶν, τοῖς δὲ διδοὺς, τοὺς δὲ πάντα 
ῳ , , \ ΄ » ΄ eae A 
τρόπον διαφθείρων, καὶ διέστησεν εἰς μέρη πολλὰ ἑνὸς τοῦ 
συμφέροντος ἅπασιν ὄντος, κωλύειν ἐκεῖνον μέγαν γίγνεσθαι. 
ἐν τοιαύτῃ δὲ καταστάσει καὶ ἔτ᾽ ἀγνοίᾳ τοῦ συνισταμένου 
εἴων , a a αν ε ΄, ¥ A 
καὶ φυομένου κακοῦ τῶν. ἁπάντων Ἑλλήνων ὄντων, δεῖ 


§ 60. 2. μές 2. 4- Kal cea pet =, 1, (-vov over -ὕθη); καὶ om. 
At. 2, B, vulg. ὦ ἄνδρες vulg.; ὦ om. 

§ 61. 2. add’ ἅπασ 3 ἀλλὰ πᾶσιν = 5. λαβὼν 2, L, vulg.; λαβὼν 
ὁ Φίλιππος At, B, F, : ae ). 


8 62. 2. vo μένου >? (from φυρομένου ?). πάντων (om. τῶν) V6. 


— 


2. προὔλαβε and κατέσχε combined νοσοῦντας ἐν αὑτοῖς, IX. 50, and κακῶς 
have the idea of crise by being before- διεκείμεθα, IX. 28. See §§ 45—49. Blass 


πλεονέκτημα; ἄνδρες 5 
᾿Αθηναῖοι, μέγ᾽ ὑπῆρξε Φιλίππῳ. παρὰ yap Tots Ἕλλησιν, 61 


hand: see note on § 4°. 

4. ἃ καὶ διεκωλύθη: see note on 
8 57°. καὶ expresses parallelism with 
προὔλαβε καὶ κατέσχε, and strengthens 
the antithesis between what Philip dzd 
before Dem. appeared and what he was 
prevented from doing afterwards. ἃ διεκω- 
λύθη represents an active form ἃ αὐτὸν 
διεκώλυσα: no infinitive is understood. 

5. τοσοῦτον ὑπειπών, after premising 
the following. Demosth. has no prefer- 
ence for the forms in -δὲ (e.g. τοσόν δε) in 
referring to what is to follow. 

6. ὑπῆρξε: see note on ὑπάρξαι μοι, 
§ 1°. 

8 61. 2. φορὰν, a crop: see the list 
" of this crop of traitors in § 295. 

5. καὶ πρότερον... ἔχοντας = οἵ καὶ 
πρότερον κακῶς εἶχον, impf. partic. Cf. 


notices the coincidence in rhythm in καὶ 
πρότερον κακῶς and καὶ στασιαστικῶς. 

8, διέστησεν... πολλὰ: cf. [X.] 52, 
γεγόνασι καθ᾽ αὑτοὺς ἕκαστοι, ᾿Αργεῖοι, 
Θηβαῖοι, Λακεδαιμόνιοι, ἹΚορίνθιοι, ᾿Αρκά- 
δες, ἡμεῖς. (Β].) 

9. κωλύειν: in apposition with ἑνὸς 
τοῦ συμφέροντος. An appositive infinitive 
generally has the article in the fully 
developed language; but not necessarily, 
for the construction is even Homeric, as 
εἷς οἰωνὸς ἄριστος, ἀμύνεσθαι περὶ πάτρης, 
Ih ΣΙ 943. 

8 62. 1. ἔτ᾽ ἀγνοίᾳ (sc. ἐν).. ὄντων 
Ξ- ἔτ᾽ ἀγνοούντων, ἔτ᾽ belonging to ἀγνοίᾳ. 
Vomel: gum adhuc ignorarent etc.— 
συνισταμένου: cf. VI. 35, ἕως. -συνίστα- 
ται τὰ πράγματα. 


af 


EE ete 


48 AHMOZOENOY2 


la CLAS 5» 3 A , ia 53 , 
σκοπεῖν ὑμᾶς, ἄνδρες ᾿Αθηναῖοι, τί προσῆκον nv ἑλέσθαι 
πράττειν καὶ ποιεῖν τὴν πόλιν, καὶ τούτων λόγον Tap ἐμοῦ 


~ ε \ 3 Af)? Ὁ Ν ͵,ὔἹ ΄“ ὕὔ PF .3 og , 
5 λαβεῖν: ὁ yap: ἐνταῦθ᾽ ἑαυτὸν τάξας. τῆς πολιτείας εἰμ ἐγώ. 
63 πότερον αὐτὴν ἐχρῆν, Αἰσχίνη, τὸ φρόνημα ἀφεῖσαν καὶ τὴν 


ἀξίαν τὴν αὑτῆς ἐν τῇ Θετταλῶν καὶ Δολόπων τάξει θέντα: 
κτᾶσθαι Φιλίππῳ τὴν TOP ee te ἀρχὴν καὶ τὰ τῶν 
προγόνων καλὰ καὶ δίκαια ἀναγρειι; ; ἢ τοῦτο μὲν μὴ ποιεῖν, 


3. ὦ ἄνδρες vulg.; ὦ om. Σ,, L. 


ἐ δεινὸν γὰρ ὡς ἀληθῶς, λὰ δ᾽ ἑώρα συμβησόμενα εἰ μηδεὶς 


nv om. L, A2, Ol. 


8 63. 2. αὐτῆς 2; ἑαυτῆς L, At, B, vulg.; αὐτῆς O. 4. κακὰ (for καλὰ) Φ. 


-----ς-ς---ς-ς-ς-ς-ς-ςςς-ςς-ς-Ἐς----- --- - a a 


3. προσῆκον ἥν: see note on § 631. 

4. πράττειν καὶ ποιεῖν: see ἃ 4°. 
When these words do not have their 
proper distinction of do and make, they 
sometimes have no apparent distinction: 
see ὃ 246419, and iv. 5, οὐδὲν ἂν ὧν νυνὶ 
πεποίηκεν ἔπραξεν. 

5. ἐνταῦθ᾽... τῆς πολιτείας : partitive. 
Cf. § 597. 

868. τ. πότερον αὐτὴν ἐχρῆν....ἀναι- 
petv; should she...have helped Philip to 
gain his dominion over the Greeks, and 
(so) have set at naught the glorious and 
just deeds of our ancestors? Here, and 
in μὴ ποιεῖν and περιιδεῖν (also depend- 
ing on ἐχρῆν), in προσῆκε ποιεῖν and 
ἔδει λέγειν ἢ γράφειν in ὃ 6674, in ἐχρῆν 
ποιεῖν in § 69°, and φανῆναι ἐχρῆν in 
§ 711°, we have (I think) simply the 
ordinary use of the infinitive depending 
on a past verb expressing duty or fro- 
priety, with none of the idiomatic force 
by which (for example) ἔδει σε ἐλθεῖν 
often means you ought to have gone (but 


did not go). These expressions are all 


repetitions or enlargements of τί mpoc- 
ἧκον ἣν in ὃ 62%, which obviously asks 
only what was it right for Athens to do? 
with no implied idea that she did or did 
not do the right thing. So in § 63! the 
question is simply was zt right for her to 
help Philip etc.? See M.T. 417, and 
PP- 493, 404. In such cases the idio- 
matic use is often forced upon the ex- 
pressions, and ἐχρῆν συγκατακτᾶσθαι is 


thought to mean ought she to have helped 
him to acgutre etc. (which she did not do)? 
But here μὴ ποιεῖν in ὃ 634 and φανῆναι 
in ὃ 717° refer to what actually happened. 
The consideration of these examples has 
convinced me that we are often wrong in 


᾿ assuming the idiomatic use where it does 


‘not exist. See notes on 88 190%, 239%. 
It is sometimes uncertain in which sense — 
we are to take such expressions. But 
when (with the present infinitive Snes . 
refer to present time, as τούσδε μὴ ζὴν 

ἔδει, these ought not to be alive, Soph. 
Phil. 418, the use is always idiomatic. 

The reiteration of the question, noticed 
above, was called ἐπιμονή. See Her- 
mogenes (III. PP- 266, 267 W.): Ταῖς 
ἐπιμοναῖς ἐφ᾽ ὧν ἰσχύομεν πραγμάτων 
χρώμεθα, ὡς ὁ ῥήτωρ ἐν τῷ περὶ στεφάνου, 
πότερον, φησὶ, τὴν πόλιν ἐχρῆν... τὴν 
ἑαυτῆς, καὶ τὰ ἑξῆς. ταύτῃ γὰρ τῇ ἐννοίᾳ 
πλέον ἢ τετράκις ἐν ταὐτῷ τόπῳ κέχρηται, 
καὶ τὸ μέγιστον διὰ τοῦ αὐτοῦ σχήματος, 
λέγω τοῦ κατ᾽ ἐρώτησιν ἐξ ἀποστροφῆς. διὰ 
γὰρ τὸ ἔνδοξον τῆς ἐννοίας ἐπιμένει καὶ 
δεινῶς ἐπίκειται τῷ ἐχθρῷ, ταῖς συνεχέσιν 
ἐρωτήσεσιν οὐδ᾽ ἀναπνεῖν ἐῶν .---τὸ φρό- 
γημα καὶ τὴν ἀξίαν, her spirit and her 
aig gnily. 

2. ἐν... «τάξει implies a descent to their 
level. The Thessalians helped Philip in 
the Amphissian war; the Dolopians are 
probably mentioned only to cipal: the 
Thessalians further. 

5. συμβησόμενα εἰ μηδεὶς κωλύσει: 


s 


TTEPI 


TOY ZTE®ANOY 


49 


, \ , a, » 5 ἴω wn 
κωλύσει, καὶ προῃσθάνεθ ὡς E€OLKEV ἐκ πολλοῦ, ταῦτα περιι- 


A , > \ A ¥ N , ἥν ῆς A 
δεῖν γιγνόμενα ; ἀλλὰ νῦν ἔγωγε τὸν μάλιστ᾽ ἐπιτιμῶντα 
lal “Δ ἴω . 
τοῖς πεπραγμένοις ἡδέως ἂν ἐροίμην, τῆς ποίας μερίδος 
γενέσθαι τὴν πόλιν ἐβούλετ᾽ ἂν, πότερον τῆς συναιτίας τῶν 
; , a Sa lal \ > A ec x 
συμβεβηκότων τοῖς Ἕλλησι κακῶν Kal αἰσχρῶν, ἧς ἂν 
Θετταλοὺς καὶ τοὺς μετὰ τούτων εἴποι τις, ἢ τῆς περιεορα- 
, “ , > plead. | Ὺ» ~ 2Q7 / > / 
Kulas ταῦτα γιγνόμενα ἐπὶ TH τῆς ἰδίας πλεονεξίας ἐλπίδι, 
e x 3 ΄, Ν ΄, Δ᾽ +9 ΄ὕ ΄ 
ns ἂν ᾿Αρκάδας καὶ Μεσσηνίους καὶ ᾿Αργείους θείημεν. 
3 Ν Ν ’ὔ ,μ" A \ / a ε ἴω 
ἀλλὰ καὶ τούτων πολλοὶ, μᾶλλον δὲ πάντες, χεῖρον ἡμῶν 


ἀπηλλάχασιν. 


ἈΝ ἈΝ > εἶ ε 5 ,ὔὕ / » » 
καὶ γὰρ εἰ MEV ὡς ἐκράτησε Φιλιππος WET 


εὐθέως ἀπιὼν καὶ μετὰ ταῦτ᾽ ἦγεν ἡσυχίαν, μήτε TOV αὑτοῦ 
~ » i 
συμμάχων μήτε TOV ἄλλων Ἑλλήνων μηδένα μηδὲν λυπήσας, 
> >” a - “ 
ἣν ἂν τις κατὰ τῶν ἐναντιωθέντων οἷς ἔπραττεν ἐκεῖνος 5 
4 Ν 4 3 » ’ὔ ε ’ὔ Ν 5 ’ὔ \ 
μέμψις καὶ κατηγορία: εἰ δὲ ὁμοίως ἁπάντων τὸ ἀξίωμα, τὴν 
ε ’ὔ * > 4 / la \ \ Ν 
ἡγεμονίαν, τὴν ἐλευθερίαν. περιείλετο, μᾶλλον δὲ καὶ τὰς 


§ 64. 3. τὴν πόλιν γενέσθαι. 
ρακυίας Σ; περιεωρακυίας L, vulg., Bk.; 
eil, Bl. 7. ay (v by corr.) >. 
§ 65. 2. ydapom. ΑΙ. 
ὑτοῦ L; αὑτοῦ vulg. 


βούλετ᾽ Al; 


3. La 
ἣν ἂν =, L!, A2; Siscoh nv ἂν vulg. 


; βούλαιτ᾽ (ε over at) Νό. 5. περι- 
ΤΩΝ Dind., Vom., West., Lips., 


auTou 2; 
τῶν οὐκ ἐναντ. 


be ; εὐθὺς vulg. 


the common older reading) Y (mg.), O (mg.); other MSS. om. οὐκ. 


cf. Aesch. III. 
μενον εἰ μὴ κωλύσετε. 


Go, ὃ πρόδηλον ἦν ἐσό- 
In both we might 


have the future optative. 


6. ταῦτα περιιδεῖν γιγνόμενα, fo allow 
these acts to go on; περιιδεῖν γενόμενα 
would be /o allow them to happen (M.T. 
148 and go3®, with the discussion of 
περιιδεῖν τμηθεῖσαν and περιιδεῖν τμηθῆναι 
in Thuc. II. 18, 20). 

8 64. 1. viv, zow, when the fight 
for liberty is ended: τοῖς πεπραγμένοις 
refers to the fight itself.—tév μάλιστ᾽ 
ἐπιτιμῶντα, i.e. the severest critic. 

3. γενέσθαι, 20 join (not 20 belong 
Zo). 

5. περιεορακνίας : I have adopted this 
form on the almost unanimous authority 
of modern scholars, even against the Mss. 
See Blass-Kiihner, §§ 198°, 343. 

6. γιγνόμενα: cf. note on ὃ 63°. 

7: ᾿Αρκάδας x.7..: see Polyb. xvii. 
14 (quoted in note on § 295°) for a defence 
of these neutrals. 


G: D. 


8 65. 2. ὡς ἐκράτησε: i.e. at Chae- 
ronea. Philip treated Athens with great 


consideration after the battle, restoring 
her 2000 prisoners without ransom; but 
wreaked his vengeance on Thebes (as a 
former ally) and invaded Peloponnesus. 
(Grote XI. 699—705.)—@xer’ ἀπιὼν : for 
this and similar expressions see M.T. 
893. 

5. ἦν ἀν τις.. κατηγορία, here might 
perhaps be some ground for blame and 
accusation etc.: the older editions have 
ὅμως ἣν ἄν τις and κατὰ τῶν οὐκ ἐναντιω- 
θέντων, with an entirely different meaning. 
(See critical note.) 

6. ἀξίωμα ... ἡγεμονίαν ... ἐλευθερίαν : 
see XIX. 260, τοῦτο τὸ πρᾶγμα (the cor- 
ruption of leading men by Philip) Θεττα- 
λῶν μὲν...τὴν ἡγεμονίαν. καὶ τὸ κοινὲν 
ἀξίωμα ἀπωλωλέκει, νῦν δ᾽ ἤδη καὶ τὴν 
ἐλευθερίαν παραιρεῖται" τὰς γὰρ ἀκρο- 
πόλεις αὐτών ἐνίων ΔΙακεδόνες φρουροῦσιν. 
For Euboea see § 71 (below). 


4 


64 


5 


65 


i 


66 


67 


50 AHMOSOQENOY> 


“a y 29 7 a > ε , > ὃ ΄ ε A 
πολιτείας, ὅσων ἐδύνατο, πῶς οὐχ ἁπάντων.ἐνδοξότατα ὑμεῖς 
3 ’ > Ν 4 
ἐβουλεύσασθε ἐμοὶ πεισθέντες ;} , 

— =< / 
> > > ‘al ed > 4 5 
| ᾿Αλλ’ ἐκεῖσ᾽ ἐπανέρχομαι. 
ῪΜ ω > ι \ / “A ε 4 ε a 
προσῆκε ποιεῖν ἀρχὴν καὶ τυραννίδα τῶν “Ἑλλήνων ὁρῶσαν 


nab Ν / > / 
τί τὴν πόλιν, Αἰσχίνη, 


ε Lal , rai x , ἧς a 
ἑαυτῷ κατασκευαζόμενον Φίλιππον; ἢ τί τὸν σύμβουλον : 
ἔδει λέγειν ἢ γράφειν τὸν ᾿Αθήνησιν (καὶ γὰρ τοῦτο 
πλεῖστον διαφέρει), ὃς συνήδειν μὲν ἐκ παντὸς τοῦ χρόνου 
d la ε ὕ 9 3 “-“ tee | eo. Ν “A ᾿ 3 Ξ ses 
μέχρι τῆς ἡμέρας ad ἧς αὐτὸς ἐπὶ τὸ βῆμα ἀνέβην, ἀεὶ: 
»-ὄοΟ ᾿ 
περὶ πρωτείων καὶ τιμῆς καὶ δόξης ἀγωνιζομένην τὴν" 
πατρίδα, καὶ πλείω καὶ χρήματα καὶ σώματα ἀνηλωκυΐαν. 


er 8 ΄ὕ N A an , Ἃ A Ε | 
ὑπὲρ φιλοτιμίας καὶ τῶν πᾶσι συμφερόντων ἢ τῶν αλλων" 
ε , ε x il > id ν ε.» 3 Φ ἘΠ 
Ἑλλήνων ὑπὲρ αὑτῶν ἀνηλώκασιν ἕκαστοι, ἑώρων δ᾽ αὐτὸν 


8. ὅσον A2, Β';; ὅσω Y, Β3, F (yp.). 
§ 66. 1. “καὶ τί V6. 2. 
(-ων twice over -ov) 1,3. bi. 
1; 4, 5. Kkal...duapéper om. V6. 
παντὸς B, vulg. 6. 


B, vulg. ie 


1. 10) 2, L; dvadwx. (in both) vulg. 
B, vulg. Io. οἵ τὰ ὑπὲρ B, vulg. 
7) Σ᾿: 


ὁρῶσαν τῶν Ἕλλ. Al. 2. 
γράφ. ἢ λέγ. Y. 


of τὰ om. 2, L, ΔΊ 


τῶν συμβούλων 
᾿Αθήν. ἐμὲ vulg.; ἐμὲ om. Σ, 
5. συνῇδειν μὲν Σ, L, ΑΙ. 2; μὲν after 


τῆς ἡμέρας Σ. 1.1, A2; τῆσδε τῆς nu. Ατ; τῆς Hm. ἐκείνης 
τιμῆς δόξης O (cf. ὃ 67%). 
σώμ. καὶ χρήμ. AI. 2; πλ. σώμ. καὶ χρήμ. vulg. 


« ὃ. πλείω... σώματα Σ, L; πλ. καὶ 
ἀνηλωκυῖαν (and ἀνηλώκασιν in 
πᾶσι Σ, L}, At. 2; ἅπασι τοῖς “Ελλησι 


ὑπὲρ aut (9% over 


8. πολιτείας, free governments. See 
Arist. Poly Vis (1v.) 8, 03, ἔστε γὰρ ἢ 
πολιτεία ws ἁπλώς εἰπεῖν μίξις ὀλιγαρχίας 
καὶ δημοκρατίας, εἰώθασι δὲ καλεῖν τὰς μὲν 


ἀποκλινούσας ὡς πρὸς τὴν δημοκρατίαν ᾿ 


πολιτείας, τὰς δὲ πρὸς τὴν ὀλιγαρχίαν 
μᾶλλον ἀριστοκρατίας διὰ τὸ μᾶλλον ἀκο- 
λουθεῖν παιδείαν καὶ εὐγένειαν τοῖς εὐπο- 
ρωτέροι. See Dem. VIII. 43, ἐχθρὸν 
ὑπειληφέναι τῆς πολιτείας Kal THs δημο- 
κρατίας ἀδιάλλακτον ἐκεῖνον, and VI. 21, 
οὐ γὰρ ἀσφαλεῖς ταῖς πολιτείαις αἱ πρὸς 
τοὺς τυράννους αὗται λίαν ὁμιλίαι. Aris- 
totle uses πολιτεία in a special sense 
(Pol. 111. 7, 3) for his third form of good 
government, opposed to δημοκρατία, its 
παρέκβασις. --- πάντων : partitive with 
ἐνδοξζότατα. So εὐφημότατ᾽ ἀνθρώπων in 
XIX. 50, ἀναισχυντότατ᾽ ἀνθρώπων ἴῃ! XXVII. 
18, δικαιότατ᾽ ἀνθρώπων ἴῃ ΧΧΙΧ. 28. 

ὃ 66. 1. ἐκεῖσ᾽ ἐπανέρχομαι, 7 re- 
turn to my question, i.e. after the digres- 


sion in § 65. 

2. προσῆκε ποιεῖν: see note on 
§ 63’. 

5. ὃς συνήδειν : the antecedent, τὸν 
σύμβουλον, refers to the speaker, and 
most MSS. insert ἐμέ after ᾿Αθήνησιν. --- 
ék...xpdvov: see ὃ 203°. ; 

6. ἀφ᾽ ἧς, when (on which), strictly 
beginning with which, counting from 
which (as a date). . 

7. ἀγωνιζομένην : ov. οὐδ. after συνῇ- 
dev, like ἀνηλωκυῖαν (8); cf. four parti- 
ciples after ἑώρων, § 671. 

8. χρήματα καὶ σώματα, money and 
Zéves. With the lordly boast of this pas- 
sage compare the allusion to Salamis in 
§ 238. ~ 

9: φιλοτιμίας, Aer honour; properly 
love of honour, but otten used like τιμή: 
οἷς Ui. ee 

§ 67. 1. ἑώρων continues the con- 
struction of ὃς συνήδειν (δ 66°). 


υἱ 


2. ὑπὲρ... δυναστείας, contrasted with 
ὑπὲρ.. συμφερόντων in ὃ 66%. δυναστεία 
is properly a government of force, not 
based on the popular will; see ὃ 270%. 
Arist. Pol. vi. (Iv.) 5, 2, speaking of 
the extreme oligarchy, ὅταν ἄρχῃ μὴ ὁ 
| νόμος ἀλλ᾽ οἱ ἄρχοντες, says, καὶ ἔστιν 
| ἀντίστροφος αὕτη ἐν ταῖς ὀλιγαρχίαις we- 
περ ἡἣ τυραννὶς ἐν ταῖς μοναρχίαις καὶ περὶ 
ἧς τελευταίας εἴπαμεν δημοκρατίας ἐν ταῖς 
δημοκρατίαις (unbridled unconstitutional 
democracy). καὶ καλοῦσιν δὴ τὴν τοιαύτην 
ὀλιγαρχίαν δυναστείαν. But Demosth. 
uses δυναστείας in ὃ 3227 of the power of 
Athens. It is generally, however, an 
odious term. 

3. τὸν ὀφθαλμὸν ἐκκεκομμένον, had had 
his eye knocked out, passive of the active 
form ἐκκόπτει τις αὐτῷ τὸν ὀφθαλμόν, re- 
taining the accus. of the thing. The 
following κατεαγότα is passive in sense, 
and has the same construction. Cf. ἀπο- 
| tunOévres τὰς κεφαλάς, Xen. An. 11. 6, 1, 
representing ἀπέτεμον αὐτοῖς τὰς κεφαλάς. 
) For other examples see Thuc. I. 126%, 
140”; Ar. Nub. 72; Plato, Men. 876 ; es- 
pecially Thuc. I. 73, εἰ καὶ δι᾿ ὄχλου μᾶλλον 
ἔσται ἀεὶ προβαλλομένοις (sc. τὰ Μηδικά), 
representing προβάλλομεν ὑμῖν τὰ Μηδικά, 
as is obscurely suggested by Kriiger. Of 
Philip’s wounds the Scholiast says, ἤδη 
ἔγνωμεν ὅτι Tov ὀφθαλμὸν ἐπλήγη ἐν τῇ 


ΠΕΡΙ TOY ΣΤΕΦΑΝΟῪ 51 


Ν ΄ εἶ a > Lin Ley ε 3 Ν πεν 3 κι Ν 
τὸν Φίλιππον, πρὸς ὃν ἣν ἡμῖν ὁ ἀγὼν, ὑπὲρ ἀρχῆς καὶ 
δυναστείας τὸν ὀφθαλμὸν ἐκκεκομμένον, τὴν κλεῖν κατεα- 
γότα, τὴν χεῖρα, τὸ σκέλος πεπηρωμένον, πᾶν ὅ τι βουληθείη 
μέρος ἡ τύχη τοῦ σώματος παρελέσθαι, τοῦτο προϊέμενον, 
@ “A r A \ al \ δόξη ζῆ ; Ν \ Oe 

στε τῷ λοιπῷ μετὰ τιμῆς καὶ δόξης ζῆν; Kal μὴν οὐδὲ 

“ ᾽ 3 3 \ “Δ > Re 4 ε a \ > / 
τοῦτό γ᾽ οὐδεὶς ἂν εἰπεῖν τολμήσαι, ὡς TO μὲν ἐν Πέλλῃ 
τραφέντι, χωρίῳ ἀδόξῳ τότε γ᾽ ὄντι καὶ μικρῷ, τοσαύτην 
μεγαλοψυχίαν προσῆκεν ἐγγενέσθαι ὥστε τῆς τῶν Ἑλλήνων 
ἀρχῆς ἐπιθυμῆσαι καὶ τοῦτ᾽ εἰς τὸν νοῦν ἐμβαλέσθαι, ὑμῖν 


8 67. 2. ἦν om. Ο, V6. ὑμῖν Α2. 4. ὅ τι ἂν βουληθείη Ατ; ὅ τι ἂν 
βουληθῇ Gell. 5. τοῦτον ᾧ. τοῦτο προϊέμενον Σ, 1,1, Gell.; “τοῦτο ἑτοίμως 
προϊέμ. = (yp), At; τοῦτο ῥᾳδίως καὶ ἑτοίμως προϊέμ. B, vulg. 6. τὸ λοιπὸν 
L; Ar. 

ὃ 68. 2. τολμήσαι D; τολμήσαι (-erev over -a) L; τολμήσειεν vulg. 4. ™poo- 
ἤκε γενέσθαι At. 5. εἰς τὸν νοῦν Σ, L, Ar; τὸν om. vulg. ᾿ ἡμῖν V6. 


Μεθώνῃ, τὴν δὲ κλεῖν ἐν ᾿Ιλλυριοῖς, τὸ δὲ 
σκέλος καὶ τὴν χεῖρα ἐν Σκύθαις. For 
Methone, captured by Philip in 353 B.c., 
see Hist. ὃ 3 (end). For the Illyrians 
see Cor. § 44, and for the Scythian cam- 
paign of Philip in 339, see Hist. § 69. 

5. προϊέμενον, i.e. always ready to 
sacrifice, followed by ὅ τι βουληθείη. 

§ 68. 2. τολμήσαι: I have retained 
this form, with most recent editors; on 
the authority of 2, though the form in 
-ee is far more common in Demosthenes 
and in other Attic prose. See Blass- 
Kiihner 11. p. 74; on the other side 
Rutherford’s New Phrynichus, pp. 433— 
438. Aristotle has the form -a: quite as 
often as -eve.—év ἸΤέλλῃ tpadévte: cf. 
Hegesippus [Dem. vII.] 7, πρὸς τὸν ἐκ 
Πέλλης ὁρμώμενον, with the same sarcasm. 
Pella was a small place until Philip en- 
larged and adorned it. See Strab. vii. 
fr. 23: τὴν Πέλλαν οὖσαν μικρὰν πρότερον 
Φίλιππος εἰς μῆκος ηὔξησε τραφεὶς ἐν 
αὐτῇ. 

4. μεγαλοψυχίαν, lofty aspirations. 
Aristotle (Eth. Iv. 3, 2) says of the μεγα- 
λόψυχος, the great-souled or high-minded 
man, δοκεῖ εἶναι ὁ μεγάλων ἑαυτὸν ἀξιῶν 
ἄξιος wy. Cf. § 2694. 

5. εἰς τὸν νοῦν ἐμβαλέσθαι :. cf. our 
phrase ¢ake tt into his head. 


4—2 


5 
68 


5 


ES eT πε πε. 


———— “ὦ. 


αν νυν Νηρ 


52 AHMOZOENOY2 


3 ἫΝ 3 , Ν Ν \ € , cease 3 a τιν 
δ᾽ οὖσιν ᾿Αθηναίοις καὶ κατὰ τὴν ἡμέραν ἑκάστην ἐν πᾶσι 
a las ee: > a ε 
καὶ λόγοις καὶ θεωρήμασι τῆς τῶν προγόνων ἀρετῆς VTO- 
ἴω “ 5 4 
μνήμαθ᾽ ὁρῶσι τοσαύτην κακίαν ὑπάρξαι ὥστε τῆς ἐλευθερίας 
lay / 
αὐτεπαγγέλτους ἐθελοντὰς Tapaxwpnoae Φιλίππῳ.) 
ἊΝ κ΄ > εἶ “A ν 
69 ἂν εἷς ταῦτα φήσειεν. λοιπὸν τοίνυν HY καὶ ἀναγκαῖον apa 
πᾶσιν οἷς ἐκεῖνος ἔπραττεν ἀδικῶν ὑμᾶς ἐναντιοῦσθαι. 
wn “- “ lal > / \ 
δικαίως. τοῦτ᾽ ἐποιεῖτε μὲν ὑμεῖς ἐξ ἀρχῆς εἰκότως Kal 
rd » δὲ Ἂν ra Ν 3 Ν θ᾽ x 
προσηκόντως, ἔγραφον OE καὶ συνεβούλευον καὶ ἐγὼ κα 
ὁμολογῶ. 


ς οὺς ἐπολιτευόμην χρόνους. 


a 3 las \ > 7 
ποιεῖν; ἤδη yap σ᾽ ἐρωτῶ, πάντα Tarn’ ἀφεὶς, ᾿Αμφίπολιν, 
Πύδναν, Ποτείδαιαν, ᾿Αλόννησον: οὐδενὸς τούτων μέμνημαι". 

Ψ \ \ / Ν Ν ΄ , Vy 

70 Σέρριον δὲ καὶ Δορίσκον καὶ τὴν Πεπαρήθου πόρθησιν καὶ 
4 = ὧν ε 7 > lal 399 > , > ’ὔ 4 
ὅσ᾽ ἄλλα ἡ πόλις ἠδικεῖτο, οὐδ᾽ εἰ γέγονεν οἶδα. καίτοι σὺ 


6. κατὰ τὴν ἡμέραν ἑκάστην Σ, Li, Ar; 
ὑπόμνημα θεωρδυσι Σ ( 


(for τῆς) V6. 


= (yp), vulg. 8. τῆς ἐλευθ. Σ, L, 
9. εθελοντας Σ; ἐθέλοντας L, At. 

8 69. 2. ἐναντιοῦσθε Σ. ae 
4. καὶ (before ἐγὼ) om. Al. 

§ 70. 1. τὴν om. V6. 2. 


ἠδικεῖτο Σ, L, Φ; ἠδίκητο vulg. 


w over δυ), Li}, Az; ὑπομνήμαθ᾽ ὁρῶσιν 


το. φήσειεν Σ, V6; φήσεις L, vulg. 
ὑμεῖς ἐξ ἀρχῆς Σ, L, B, Ar; ἐξ dpx. ὑμ. vulg. 


οὐδ᾽ 


ἀλλὰ τί ἐχρὴν με 


καθ᾽ iy. éx. L? (yp), B, vulg. 7. Tos 


A2; τῆς τῶν Ἑλλήνων ἐλευθ. vulg. 


ὅσ᾽ ἄλλα =, 1.1, A2; ὅσα ἄλλα τοιαῦτα vulg. — 


--. 


6. ἐν πάσι...θεωρήμασι, i.e. 27 αὐ 
that you hear and see: θεώρημα is very 
rare for θέαμα. 

7. ὑπομνήμαθ᾽ ὁρῶσι, beholding mne- 
morials; ὁρῶσι by a slight zeugma in- 
cluding λόγοις: cf. Aeschyl. Prom. 21 
οὔτε φωνὴν οὔτε Tou μορφὴν βροτῶν ὄψει. 

8. κακίαν: see note on ὃ 2ο".--ῷπάρ- 
ξαι and ἐγγενέσθαι (4) depend on προσ- 
AKev. 

9. αὐτεπαγγέλτους ἐθελοντὰς, as se//- 
offered volunteers: cf. § ο99.---οὐδ᾽ ἂν εἷς: 
see M. T. 219: οὐδ᾽ εἷς (separated) ΞΞ 726 
unus quidem, not a man. 

§ 69. τ. ἀναγκαῖον ἅμα: cf. ἀνα- 
γκαῖον καὶ δίκαιον ἅμα, § οἷ. 

2. ἔπραττεν ἀδικῶν, in strong anti- 
thesis to ἐναντιοῦσθαι δικαίως. 

3. ἐξ ἀρχῆς: this refers’ strictly only 
to the time of his own leadership (καθ᾽ 
ods ἐπολιτευόμην xpovous). But he modest- 
ly and speciously appears to represent 
his own vigorous policy as a continuation 
of earlier energy. When Philip was cap- 


turing Amphipolis, Pydna, and Potidaea, 
Athens was supinely inactive; but De- 
mosthenes was not yet a responsible 
adviser. In §§ 18 and 60 he expressly 
disclaims all responsibility for these earlier 
times. 

5. τί ἐχρῆν pe ποιεῖν ; see note on 
§ 63. 
6. ἤδη σ᾽ ἐρωτῶ : the third time of 
asking. See note on § 63! and the quo- 
tation from Hermogenes.—adels, /eaving 
out of account: for Amphipolis, Pydna, 
and Potidaea, see Hist. § 3; for Halon- 
nesus, Hist. $$ 55, 56, 57. 

$70. 1. For Serrhium and Doriscus 
see note on ὃ 27°. For the sacking of 
Peparethus (in 341—340 B.C.) see Hist. 
8 66. ταύτην ἐπόρθησεν "Αλκιμος ναύαρχ' ς 
τοῦ Φιλίππου, Schol. The people of Pe- 
parethus, an ally of Athens, had taken 
Halonnesus from Philip and captured his 
garrison. 

2. οὗδ᾽ εἰ γέγονεν οἶδα: cf. XXI. 78, 
τοῦτον οὐδ᾽ εἰ γέγονεν εἰδώς, not deing 


ΠΕΡΙ TOY ZTEbANOY | 53 


Φ ἂν 4 κ΄ ᾽ὔ 3 », ΕῚ a \ 
γ᾽ ἔφησθά pe ταῦτα λέγοντα εἰς ἔχθραν ἐμβαλεῖν τουτουσὶ, 


“ἂν βουληθῇς. 


Εὐβούλου καὶ ᾿Αριστοφῶντος καὶ Διοπείθους τῶν περὶ 
τούτων ψηφισμάτων ὄντων, οὐκ ἐμῶν, ὦ λέγων εὐχερώς ὅ τι 5 
οὐδὲ νῦν περὶ τούτων .Epa. 
Ἑύβοιαν ἐκεῖνος σφετεριζόμενος καὶ κατασκευάζων ἐπιτεί- 
χισμ᾽ ἐπὶ τὴν ᾿Αττικὴν, καὶ Μεγάροις ἐπιχειρῶν, καὶ κατα- 


4. ᾿Αριστοφῶντος = (mg.), L, vulg.; Κτησιφῶντος =! (dots beneath), 42. 


5. ὄντων ψηφ. Al. 
8 71. 2. ἐπιτειχίσματα Ο. 


λέγω (ν above line) =. 6. 


Σ οὐδὲν νῦν At. 


aware even of his existence.—ov ¥ ἔφησθα: 
see Aesch. III. 82, ἀρχὰς αὐτοῖς ἐνεδίδου 
πολέμου καὶ ταραχῆς. : 

3. ταῦτα λέγοντα (not εἰπόντα), i.e. dy 
everlastingly talking about these. 

4. EvBotdov kal ᾿Αριστοφῶντος: in 
replying to Aeschines (as quoted above) 
he is glad to be able to refer to decrees of 
his political opponents while there were 
none of his own. Eubulus, though he 
was the leader of the peace party and 
always friendly to Philip, might have 
proposed decrees directing negotiations 
with Philip about the towns captured by 
Philip or the later affair of Peparethus; and 
he might have proposed one remonstrat- 
ing against the seizure of Athenian ships 
(§ 73), like the spurious one in §§ 73, 74. 
The decrees of Eubulus and Aristophon 
read to the court (§§ 73—75) may have 
referred to any of these subjects. As 
Aristophon lived to near the age of a 
hundred, he may have proposed bills 
from 346 to 340 B.C., though he was 
born before the Peloponnesian War. See 
Schaefer 1. 138, 183.—Diopithes is prob- 
ably not the general, but the Sphettian, 
of whom Hyperides (Eux. ΧΧΧΙΧ. 29) 
says, ὃς δεινότατος ἐδόκει εἶναι τῶν ἐν τῇ 
πόλει. 

6. οὐδὲ... ἐρῶ: the third παράλειψις 
(cf. 88 69’, 707), in which a fact is im- 
pressively stated by declaring that it shall 
not be mentioned. 

ὃ 71. 2. ἐκεῖνος: this position is 
allowed the demonstrative when another 
qualifying word follows the article: cf. 
ἡ στενὴ αὕτη ὁδός, Xen. An. Iv. 2, 6. 


But even then, the regular order may be 
kept (Madvig, Synt. § 11).—oderepi{é- 
μενος (from adérepos), appropriating, 
making his own, of unlawful or unjust 
appropriation: cf. XXXII. 2, σφετερίσα- 
σθαι, and Aeschyl. Suppl. 39, λέκτρων 
σφετεριξάμενον ἐπιβῆναι. For the active 
ἐσφετέρισαν see Plat. Leg. 715 A. Iam 
indebted to Dr Murray of Oxford for an 
example of the English verb spheterize, 
in a letter of Sir Wm Jones in S. Parr’s 
Works (1828), I. τοῦ, ‘‘Remember to 
reserve for me a copy of your book. I 
am resolved to spheterize some passages 
of it.’ The dictionaries often refer to 
Burke for this word.—émutelyiopa ἐπὶ 
τὴν ᾿Αττικὴν, as a fortress commanding 
Attica. An ἐπιτείχισμα is properly a 
fortress in an enemy’s country, used as 
a military basis, like the Spartan fort at 
Decelea in the Peloponnesian War. Here 
Euboea in Philip’s hands is figuratively 
described as such a fortress commanding 
Attica; and the sight of its high moun- 
tains across the narrow strait made the 
figure especially vivid to dwellers in the 
east of Attica: see ὃ 874 and note. See 
vill. 36, of the tyrants in Eretria and 
Oreus, δύο ἐν Εὐβοίᾳ κατέστησε τυράννους, 
τὸν μὲν ἀπαντικρὺ τῆς ᾿Αττικῆς ἐπιτειχί- 
σας, τὸν δ᾽ ἐπὶ Σκίαθον. Cf. Thuc. 1. 
I. 1424, πα gr? στ 180 ΤΙ pas- 
sage relates to Philip’s operations in 
Euboea in 343—342 B.c. See 8 707 
with note, and Hist. § 58. 

3. Μεγάροις ἐπιχειρῶν: in 344—343 
B.c. Philip attempted to get possession of 
Megara, with the help of his friends in 


ἀλλ᾽ ὁ τὴν 71 


54 AHMOZOENOYE 


\ Ν 
λαμβάνων ᾿Ωρεὸν, καὶ κατασκάπτων Πορθμὸν, καὶ καθιστὰς 
la τ ΄ 
5 ἐν μὲν Oped Φιλιστίδην τύραννον ἐν δ᾽ ᾿Βρετρίᾳ Κλείταρχον, 
Ν ἧς ε 4 ε > «e ~ Ξ % 4, 
καὶ τὸν Ἑλλήσποντον ὑφ᾽ ἑαυτῷ ποιούμενος, καὶ Βυζάντιον 
a \ / ε / ἃ Ν 3 A > a \ 
πολιορκῶν, Kal πόλεις Ἑλληνίδας as μὲν ἀναιρῶν εἰς as δὲ 
ἴω al τ 
τοὺς φυγάδας κατάγων, πότερον ταῦτα πάντα ποιών ἠδίκει 
καὶ παρεσπόνδει καὶ ἔλυε τὴν εἰρήνην ἢ οὖ; καὶ πότερον 
το φανῆναί τινα τῶν Ἑλλήνων τὸν ταῦτα κωλύσοντα ποιεῖν 
> Ν 3 “~ x , > \ ἣν \ > “A Ψ Ἄς Χ ” 
J72 αὐτὸν ἐχρὴν ἣ μή; εἰ μὲν yap μὴ ἐχρῆν, ἀλλὰ THY Μυσῶν 
΄ \ ε 5 A ‘ 
λείαν καλουμένην τὴν Ἑλλάδα οὖσαν ὀφθῆναι ζώντων Kat 
¥ 
ὄντων ᾿Αθηναίων, περιείργασμαι μὲν ἐγὼ περὶ τούτων εἰπὼν, 
Ue Sie / ε ae. , Ψ ate ΄ 
περιείργασται δ᾽ ἡ πόλις ἡ πεισθεῖσ᾽ ἐμοὶ, ἔστω δὲ ἀδική- 
Δ » 
5 ματα πάντ᾽ ἃ πέπρακται καὶ ἁμαρτήματ᾽ ἐμά. εἰ δ᾽ ἔδει 


ΖΑ 2. λείαν {εἰ fr. δ) Z. 
A2, B, Y, ®; πάντα Ταῦτα, vulg. 


ζώντ. AO. καὶ ὄντ. vulg. 5. mwavra z, L, 


4, 5. wpady and wpa Σ. 6. τὸ Βυζάντιον Ar (cf. ὃ 807). 7. as μὲν D, 
| L, A2, B; ras wév Al, Y, vulg. eis ἃς δὲ Σ, L, Ar. 2, B; εἰς ras δὲ ΟἹ (τὴ erased). 
| Older editions have rwas...rwas or τὰς.. τὰς : see Reiske and Dobson. 8. πάντα 
ταῦτα F; πάντα om. L. 9. τὴν εἰρ. ἔλυε L. 


the city. See § 48° and Hist. § 52. 
Megara is mentioned here with Euboea 
because its close proximity to Athens 
would have made it, in Philip’s hands, 
another ἐπιτείχισμα ἐπὶ τὴν ᾿Αττικήν. 

6. τὸν Ἑλλήσποντον: for Philip’s 
operations in the Hellespont and at By- 
zantium, see 88 87—89, and 244. 

7. ἃς μὲν... εἰς ds δὲ: very rare for 
Tas pév...eis Tas δὲ: in XLI. 11 we have 
ἃ μὲν (cod. A τὰ μὲν).. τῶν δὲ... τὰ δὲ. 
See Philem. frag. 99 (Kock) ὧν μὲν διὰ 
τύχην, ὧν δὲ dv ἑαυτούς. (See Vomel.) 

8. τοὺς φυγάδας κατάγων: i.e. 7e- 
storing his own exiled partizans. 

ΟΣ τ, οὔ! sc. ἠδίκειυ x.7.A.; but (in 11) 
ἢ μή : sc. φανῆναι. 

Io. τὸν ταῦτα κωλύσοντα--ὃς τ. κω- 
λύσει (final); in ὃ 72° is the simple 
κωλυτὴν; both predicates with φανῆναι. 

11. ἐχρῆν ἢ μή: the question is here 
put for the fourth time: see note on 
§ 63°. 

8 72. 1. εἰ μὲν γὰρ μὴ ἐχρῆν : the 
alternative is εἰ δ᾽ ἔδει (5).--ττὴν Μυσῶν 
λείαν, AZysian booty, i.e. like the Mysians, 


ΞΕ 


a prey to everybody. παροιμία" τάττεται 
δὲ ἐπὶ τῶν μάτην καὶ ἀναιτίως ἀπολλυμέ- 
νων (Schol.). παροιμία, ἥν φησι Δήμων 
τὴν ἀρχὴν λαβεῖν ἀπὸ τῶν καταδραμόντων 
ἀστυγειτόνων τε καὶ λῃστῶν τὴν Μυσίαν 
κατὰ τὴν Τηλέφου τοῦ βασιλέως ἀποδημίαν, 
Harpocr. This refers to the wanderings 
of Telephus, disguised as a beggar, in 
quest of Achilles, who had wounded him 
and alone could cure his wound. This 
was the plot of the much-ridiculed Tele- 
phus of Euripides: see Plat. Gorg. 521 B; 
Arist. Rhet. I. 12, 20. 

2. ὀφθῆναι: sc. ἐχρῆν (without μή). --- 
ζώντων καὶ ὄντων: see note on § 4°. 
See Plat. Rep. 369D, τοῦ elvai τε καὶ 
ζῆν. 

3. περιείργασμαι, 7 have done a useless 
(superfluous) work: περιττῶς καὶ οὐκ ava- 
ykalws παρηνεσά τε ἐγὼ καὶ ἡ πόλις 7 
πεισθεῖσα μάτην ἐπείσθη (Schol.). 

4. ἔστω... ἐμά : ἀδίκηματα καὶ ἁμαρτή- 
ματα ἐμά is predicate to ἔστω. See 
ἀδίκημα, crime, and ἁμάρτημα, blunder, 
distinguished in § 274. 


τ - 


ΠΕΡΙ TOY ΣΤΕΦΑΝΟῪ 55 


κ᾿ A > » x 
τινὰ τούτων κωλυτὴν φανῆναι, τίν ἄλλον ἢ τὸν ᾿Αθηναίων 


"49 δῆμον προσῆκεν γενέσθαι; ; ταῦτα τοίνυν ἐπολυτευόμην € χρη 


καὶ per καταδουλούμενον πάντας ἀνθρώπους ἐκεῖνον ἦναν- 
τιούμην, καὶ προλέγων καὶ διδάσκων μὴ προΐεσθαι διετέλουν. 


Καὶ μὴν τὴν εἰρήνην γ᾽ ἐκεῖνος ἔλυσε τὰ πλοῖα λαβὼν 7 73 


οὐχ ἡ πόλις, Αἰσχίνη. 
la > > Ν Ν ’,’ \ \ > \ Χ ΄ 
Φέρε δ᾽ αὐτὰ τὰ ψηφίσματα καὶ τὴν ἐπιστολὴν τὴν τοῦ 
¥ Ἂ ’ » ~ > Ν \ 4 ’ ’, » / 
Φιλίππου, καὶ λέγε ἐφεξῆς: ἀπὸ yap τούτων τίς τίνος αἰτιός 


ἐστι γενήσεται φανερόν. 


ΨΗΦΙΣΜΑ. 


> a , al 
| [Ἐπὶ ἄρχοντος Νεοκλέους, μηνὸς βοηδρομιῶνος, ἐκκλησίας 
συγκλήτου ὑπὸ στρατηγῶν, Εὔβουλος Μνησιθέου ἹΚόπρειος ἐἶπεν, 
> Ἄ J e ee An - 9 / ς + 
ἐπειδὴ προσήγγειλαν οἱ στρατηγοὶ ἐν τῇ ἐκκλησίᾳ ὡς ἄρα Λεω- 
> ‘al / 
δάμαντα τὸν ναύαρχον Kal τὰ μετ᾽ αὐτοῦ ἀποσταλέντα σκάφη 


6. 
Σ (τούτων corr. from τοῦτον 3) L; τούτων κωλ. dav. Ar (mg.). 
At. 7. Ojuov’AOnr. L. προσῆκεν 2; προσῆκε L, At, 
ἐπολιτευόμην τότ᾽ vulg.; τότ᾽ om. Σ, L, ΑΙ. 2. 


τούτων τινὰ κωλύτην O; τούτων κωλυτὴν (without τινὰ) vulg.; τινὰ τούτων KWH. 

μᾶλλον (for ἄλλον) 
F, Φ; προσήκει vulg. 
προΐεσθαι Σ, L, A2; 


SS SS = 


(at end) vulg.; om. 2, L, F, 


“προΐεσθαι ταῦτα Φιλίππῳ vulg.; προέσθαι At, O. διετέλουν Σ, 1.1, Ar. 2, ®; 
om. F, Y. 

§73. 3. δὲ Σ, V6; δ᾽ L, Ar; δὴ vulg. ταῦτα A2. τὴν τοῦ om. At. 
4. τούτων Σ᾽, 1.1, A2; τούτων ἐξεταζομένων = (late mg.), L? (mg.), vulg. 5. λέγε. 


9. μὴ προΐεσθαι, wot 10 make sur- 
renders (not to give up your own). προΐ- 
εσθαι is here absolute, as in Arist. Eth. 
Ill. 5, 14: τότε μὲν οὗν ἐξῆν αὐτῷ μὴ 


 γοσεῖν, προεμένῳ δ᾽ οὐκέτι, i.e. after he 


γι 


᾿ 


᾿ 


= 


4 


the notes. 


has sacrificed his health. 

ὃ 78. τ. καὶ μὴν.. λαβὼν : this seizure 
of merchant ships by Philip’s cruisers, of 
which we have no other knowledge, was 
the overt act which Athens made the 
occasion of her declaration of war. It 
ahaa hastened this declaration by a 
few weeks; but after the letter of Philip 
(§ 76), which was practically a declaration 
of war on his part, only one course was 
open to Athens. For the formalities with 
which Athens declared war and removed 
the column on which the peace of Philo- 
crates was inscribed, see Hist. § 68, with 
This probably took place in 


the autumn of 340 B.C. 

3. φέρε: see note on ὃ 285.---τὴν ἐπι- 
στολὴν: this was a detailed statement 
of Philip’s grievances, with a defence of 
his own conduct towards Athens, ending 
with a formal declaration of war. The 
document numbered XII. among the ora- 
tions of Demosthenes purports to be this 
letter; and it is accepted as genuine 
(at least in substance) by most modern 
scholars, including Grote (XI. 630). See 
Hist. § 68. The letter contained in 
88. 77, 78 is of course spurious. 

4. τίς τίνος: such double interroga- 
tives are common in Greek, but colloquial 
or comic in English, as who’s who? An 
increase of the number becomes comic_it ‘in 
Greek; as in Iv. 36, τίς xopnyds.. wore 
καὶ παρὰ τοῦ καὶ τί λαβόντα τί δεῖ ποιεῖν. 


---.- 


Io 


56 AHMOZOENOY | 


v pa | \ la) 7 ὌΝ > ‘BAN / δ \ ; 

εἴκοσιν ἐπὶ THY τοῦ σίτου παραπομπὴν ELS ἤσποντον ὁ Tapa 

/ y ek / / > M ἃ , κ us 

Φιλίππου στρατηγὸς ᾿Αμύντας καταγήοχεν εἰς Μακεδονίαν καὶ ἐν 
ra) an \ \ \ \ 

φυλακῇ ἔχει, ἐπιμεληθῆναι τοὺς πρυτάνεις καὶ τοὺς στρατηγοὺς 

A an / \ F 
ὅπως ἡ βουλὴ συναχθῇ Kai αἱρεθῶσι πρέσβεις πρὸς Φίλιππον, 
\ \ \ a ? an 

74 οἵτινες παραγενόμενοι διαλέξονται πρὸς αὐτὸν περὶ TOV ἀφεθῆναι 

rn Ἁ , \ > \ ’ 

τὸν ναύαρχον Kal τὰ πλοῖα καὶ TOUS στρατιώτας. Καὶ εἰ μὲν δὲ 

ἴω 7] e- > / “ >’ π᾿". 4 n 

ἄγνοιαν ταῦτα πεποίηκεν ὁ ᾿Αμύντας, OTL ov μεμψιμοιρεῖ ὁ δῆμος 
a “Ὁ \ \ / \ 

οὐδὲν αὐτῷ᾽ εἰ δέ τι πλημμελοῦντα παρὰ τὰ ἐπεσταλμενᾶ λαβὼν, 
ο a / Ns \ a bd 7 

ς ὅτι ἐπισκεψάμενοι ᾿Αθηναῖοι ἐπιτιμήσουσι κατὰ τὴν τῆς ολιγωρίας 

> “7 > \ 7 A > \ 5 + ΣΟ > a x 

ἀξίαν. εἰ δὲ μηδέτερον τούτων ἐστὶν, ἀλλ, ἰδίᾳ ἀγνωμονοῦσιν ἢ 

3 “ “f > / 
ὁ ἀποστείλας ἢ ὁ ἀπεσταλμένος, Kal τοῦτο λέγειν, ἵνα αἰσθανόμενος 


250 


ὁ δῆμος βουλεύσηται τί δεῖ ποιεῖν. | 

Τοῦτο μὲν τοίνυν τὸ ψήφισμα EvBovhos ἔγραψεν, οὐκ 
ἐγὼ, τὸ δ᾽ ἐφεξῆς ᾿Αριστοφῶν, εἶθ᾽ Ἡγήσιππος, εἶτ᾽ ᾿Αριστο- 
ΜᾺ / ἘῊ / > “ 5 Α͂ 
φῶν πάλιν, εἶτα Φιλοκράτης, εἶτα Κηφισοφῶν, εἶτα πάντες" 


λέγε. 


75 


ΛΑ 51. 5. OA \ , 
eyw ὃ οὐδὲν πέρι τούτων. 


= ΨΉΦΙΣΜΑ. 


Γ[Επὶ Νεοκλέους ἄρχοντος, βοηδρομιῶνος ἕνῃ καὶ νέᾳ, βουλῆς 
γνώμῃ, πρυτάνεις καὶ στρατηγοὶ ἐχρημάτισαν τὰ ἐκ τῆς ἐκκλησίας 
> “ ” A 7 / ς / \ / 
ἀνενεγκόντες, ὅτι ἔδοξε τῷ δήμῳ πρέσβεις ἑλέσθαι πρὸς Φίλιππον 
περὶ τῆς τῶν πλοίων ἀνακομιδῆς καὶ ἐντολὰς δοῦναι κατὰ τὰ ἐκ 

το τῆς ἐκκλησίας ψηφίσματα. καὶ εἵλοντο τούσδε, Κηφισοφῶντα 
Κλέωνος ᾿Αναφλύστιον, Δημόκριτον Δημοφῶντος ᾿Αναγυράσιον, 
na ¢ 
Πολύκριτον ᾿Απημάντου Κοθωκίδην. mputaveia φυλῆς ἱππο- 
θωντίδος, ᾿Αριστοφῶν Κολλυτεὺς πρόεδρος εἶπεν. 


y / ὃ ᾽ς. ω Ἂ Ν , Y 
ὥσπερ τοίνυν ἔγω TAVTA δεικνύω τὰ ψηφίσματα, οὕτω 

Ν \ va 9 / ε aA SN , νὴ Ξ , 
καὶ σὺ δεῖξον, Αἰσχίνη, ὅποιον ἔγω γράψας ψήφισμα αὐτιος 


76 


75. 3. πάντες Σ, 1.1, Az; πάντες οἱ ἄλλοι vulg. 4. λέγε. Σ; λέγε τὸ 
ψήφισμα. L, vulg. 
8 76. 2. Kxalom. 2}. ὁποῖον Σ, L, Α2; ποῖον vulg. 
8 75. 4. ἐγὼ δ᾽ οὐδὲν περὶ τούτων: γράψαντος for ψηφίσματα γράψαντος) : see 


this with § 76? is a positive denial of the Hist. ὃ 68, note. Though Demosthenes 


statement of Aeschines (III. 55) that the 


x 


was constantly proposing decrees at this 


decree declaring war was proposed by 
Demosthenes. The authority of Philo- 
chorus, claimed for this statement, is based 
on an unnecessary emendation (ψήφισμα 


time, he cannot have proposed the one 
which formally declared war or any on the 
matters mentioned in ὃ 70 or about the 
seizure of ships (i.e. rept τούτων). 


251 


ΠΕΡῚ TOY ΣΤΕΦΑΝΘῪ 57 


εἰμι τοῦ πολέμου. | ἀλλ᾽ οὐκ ἂν ἔχοις: εἰ yap εἶχες, οὐδὲν 
ἂν αὐτοῦ πρότερον νυνὶ παρέσχου. καὶ μὴν οὐδ᾽ ὁ Φίλιππος 
οὐδὲν αἰτιᾶται ἔμ᾽ ὑπὲρ τοῦ πολέμου, ἑτέροις ἐγκαλῶν. 
λέγε δ᾽ αὐτὴν τὴν ἐπιστολὴν τὴν τοῦ Φιλίππου. 


ἘΠΙΣΤΟΛΗ. - ΠῚ 


* n lal A 

[Βασιλεὺς Μακεδόνων Φίλιππος ᾿Αθηναίων τῇ βουλῇ καὶ τῷ 

/ \ ’ a \ 
δήμῳ χαίρειν. παραγενόμενοι πρὸς ἐμὲ οἱ Tap ὑμῶν πρεσβευταὶ, 
Κηφισοφῶν καὶ Δημόκριτος καὶ LlodvKpitos, διελέγοντο περὶ τῆς 
a / > e a e > / / 2 x4 \ 
TOV πλοίων ἀφέσξως ὧν ἐναυάρχει Λεωδάμας. καθ᾽ ὅλου μὲν 
οὖν ἔμοιγε φαίνεσθε ἐ itn εὐηθείᾳ ἔσεσθαι, εἰ οἴεσθ᾽ ἐμὲ 
pouye φαίνεσθε ἐν μεγάλῃ εὐηθείᾳ ἔσεσθαι, εἰ οἴε ἐμὲ 

, Ψ ’ ΄ Qn \ al / \ e ἈΝ 
λανθάνειν ὅτι ἐξαπεστάλη ταῦτα τὰ πλοῖα πρόφασιν μὲν ὡς τὸν 

a / ἴω 4 “ 
σῖτον παραπέμψοντα ἐκ τοῦ ᾿λλησπόντου εἰς Λῆμνον, βοηθή- 
a a fal / 
govta δὲ Σηλυβριανοῖς τοῖς ὑπ᾽ ἐμοῦ μὲν πολιορκουμένοις, οὐ 
$ a a / a o 
συμπεριειλημμένοις δὲ ἐν ταῖς τῆς φιλίας κοινῇ κειμέναις ἡμῖν 
lal , “Ὁ / , “ 

συνθήκαις. καὶ ταῦτα συνετάχθη τῷ ναυάρχῳ ἄνευ μὲν τοῦ δήμου 
ἋΣ , / [4] “ 
τοῦ ᾿Αθηναίων, ὑπὸ δέ τινων ἀρχόντων καὶ ἑτέρων ἰδιωτών μὲν νῦν 
bd , \ lal - lal 
ὄντων, ἐκ παντὸς δὲ τρόπου βουλομένων τὸν δῆμον ἀντὶ τῆς νῦν 
ξ , \ 2. 298 / \ , b) a A 
ὑπαρχούσης πρὸς ἐμὲ φιλίας Tov πόλεμον αναλαβεῖν, πολλῷ 


77 


78 


μᾶλλον φιλοτιμουμένων τοῦτο συντετελέσθαι ἢ τοῖς Σηλυβριανοῖς ς 


a \ δ / ς tal \ lal / 
βοηθῆσαι. καὶ ὑπολαμβάνουσιν αὑτοῖς τὸ τοιοῦτο πρόσοδον 
ἔσεσθαι" οὐ μέντοι μοι δοκεῖ τοῦτο χρήσιμον ὑπάρχειν οὔθ᾽ ὑμῖν 
οὔτ᾽ ἐμοί. διόπερ Ta τε νῦν καταχθέντα πλοῖα πρὸς ἡμᾶς ἀφίημι 
ὑμῖν, καὶ τοῦ λοιποῦ, ἐὰν βούλησθε μὴ ἐπιτρέπειν τοῖς προεστη- 
<u ro ete 7 ͵ ; ais A , 
κοσιν ὑμῶν κακοήθως πολιτεύεσθαι, ar ἐπιτιμᾶτε, πειράσομαι 
kayo διαφυλάττειν τὴν εἰρήνην. εὐτυχεῖτε.] 

> Af la > oF 

Ενταῦθ᾽ οὐδαμοῦ Δημοσθένην γέγραφεν, οὐδ᾽ αἰτίαν 

> / > a > > lal >” ἴω ἴω 
οὐδεμίαν κατ᾽ ἐμοῦ. τί ποτ᾽ οὖν τοῖς ἄλλοις ἐγκαλῶν τῶν 
3 Ν \ ν A / x 
ἐμοὶ πεπραγμένων οὐχὶ μέμνηται; OTL τῶν ἀδικημάτων ἂν 
3 ἴω ἴω » ἴω > » , 
ἐμέμνητο τῶν αὑτοῦ, εἴ TL περὶ ἐμοῦ γ᾽ ἔγραφεν: τούτων 


3. εἴχεσ (o from τ᾽ ἢ) Σ. 5. ἐμὲ Σ, L, B; pe vulg. 6. «τὴν rod 2, F, Y, 
ΑΙ; τὴν om. L, vulg. 
§ 79. 4. ἑαντοῦ O, V6. yeypapev X; γέγραφε L, vulg.; γ᾽ ἔγραφεν 


Droysen (1839); ἐγεγράφει Devarius, Dind. 


§ 76. 6. ἐπιστολὴν: see note on recent case in which Demosth. had op- 
§ 73°. posed him, without alluding to some 
ὃ 79. 3. Ott...rov αὑτοῦ: this im- disgraceful act of his own. 
plies that Philip could not speak of any 4. ......y’ ἔγραφεν : this absolutely 


Io 


79 


\ 


58 AHMOZOENOY2 


Ν 3 } ΄ὕ y Y “ 3 lad 
τὴν εἰς Πελοπόννησον πρεσβείαν ἔγραψα, OTE πρῶτον EKELVOS 
3 / / > ἣν > » -¢ fi. 2 
εἰς Πελοπόννησον παρεδύετο, εἶτα τὴν εἰς Εὔβοιαν, ἡνίκ 
ς 5 \ 3.5 » ΟΣ" ΄ 
Εὐβοίας ἥπτετο, εἶτα τὴν ἐπ᾿ ᾿Ὡρεὸν ἔξοδον, οὐκέτι πρεσβείαν, 
Ν 4 ~ 5 7? 
καὶ τὴν εἰς ᾿Ἐρέτριαν, ἐπειδὴ τυράννους ἐκεῖνος ἐν ταῦταις 


la la) x > / 
80 ταῖς πόλεσι κατέστησεν. μετὰ ταῦτα δὲ τοὺς ἀποστόλους 


+ 


9 \ XN 
ἅπαντας ἀπέστειλα, Kal’ ods Χερρόνησος ἐσώθη καὶ τὸ 
, Ὄ coc \ Ν 
Βυζάντιον καὶ πάντες οἱ σύμμαχοι. ἐξ ὧν ὕμιν μὲν τὰ 
/ μὰ / Ν rd δ ὁ ‘\ 
κάλλιστα, ἔπαινοι, δόξαι, τιμαὶ, στέφανοι, χάριτες παρὰ 
ἴω > al la lal Ν 
τῶν εὖ πεπονθότων ὑπῆρχον τῶν δ᾽ ἀδικουμένων τοὺς μεν 
lal rf “A 2 3 
ὑμῖν τότε πεισθεῖσιν ἡ σωτηρία περιεγένετο, τοὺς δ᾽ ὀλιγω- 
a lal “ =" 
ρήσασι τὸ πολλάκις ὧν ὑμεῖς προείπατε μεμνῆσθαι καὶ 


7 ε ~ x / ¥ ε “Ἂ 3 ᾿ς % - 
νομίζειν ὑμᾶς μὴ μόνον εὔνους ἑαυτοῖς ἀλλα καὶ φρονίμους 
ἃ 


> / μὴ ’ὔ > / Ν 3 ,)} 
ἀνθρώπους καὶ μάντεις εἰναι: πᾶντα yap ἐκβέβηκεν ἃ 


8. ρεῷ At. 


8 80. 1. μετὰ δὲ ταῦτα Σ', Az; μετὰ ταῦτα δὲ = (corr.), vulg. 2. πάντας. 
Al. τὸ Bug. =, L, Az (cf. § 71°); τὸ om. vulg. 3. μὲν ὑμῖν V6. 
ὑπῆρχον Σ, Li, Ar; ἐγίγνοντο 1,7 (over ὑπῆρχον), vulg. 6. ἡμῖν Νό. 


5. 
8. ἑαυτοῖς > (line through ἐ), L, Ar. 2; αὐτοῖς B, vulg. 


certain but long neglected correction of 
Droysen (1839), hardly an emendation, 
is now generally adopted for the im- 
possible γέγραφεν or γέγραφε of the 
mss. Others read ἐγεγράφει : see G. H. 
Schaefer’s note (Appar. Crit. et Exeg.). 

5. εἰχόμην, clung to, followed up 
closely. 

6. εἰς Πελοπόννησον: probably the 
embassy of 344, on which Demosth. made 
the speech to the Messenians and Argives 
which he quotes in the Second Philippic, 
20—25. This agrees better with dre 
πρῶτον mapedvero than the later embassy 
mentioned in the Third Philippic 72. 
See Isoc. v. 74, and Hist. 88 51, 52. 

7. παρεδύετο, was working his way, 
stealing in: cf. wapédv, XXII. 48.---τὴν 
εἰς Εὔβοιαν (sc. πρεσβείαν): this was 
sent in 343—342 B.C., when Philip was 
establishing the tyrannies at Eretria and 
Oreus (§ 71). 

8. τὴν ἐπ᾽ ’Opedv... Eperplay: these 
are the two military expeditions to Eu- 


boea in 341 B.C., by which the two 
tyrannies in Oreus and Eretria were 
suppressed, the tyrants Philistides and 
Clitarchus were killed, and the whole 
island was left free from Philip’s influence. 
See Hist. § 64. 

§ 80. 1. ἀποστόλους : the orators use 
ἀπόστολος, properly a messenger (N. Test. 
apostle), for a naval armament: cf. οὔτε 
ναυσὶ κρατήσας ἦλθεν dv ποτε στόλῳ, οὔτε 
πεζῇ k.T.A., VI. 36. 

2. ἀπέστειλα: properly used with 
ἀποστόλους, J sent out (by my decrees): 
cf. πρεσβείαν ἔγραψα, ὃ 79°.—Xeppovycos 
οὐ σύμμαχοι: see δὲ 87--80, 240, 241. 

4. ἔπαινοι... χάριτες : the decrees con- 
ferring these grateful rewards on Athens 
were read after ἃ 89. 

6. τοῖς δ᾽ ὀλιγωρήσασι: this refers 
to the Peloponnesians who neglected the 
advice of Demosthenes in 344 B.C. (§ 79°) 
and later (IX. 27, 34), and to the early 
refusal of Oreus and Eretria to listen to 
Athens (1X. 57, 66, 68). 


δ 
΄ \ A \ | 

ς yap εἰχόμην ἐγὼ καὶ τούτοις ἠναντιούμην. καὶ πρῶτον μεν 2 52 
᾿ 


4 


+ 


ΠΕΡῚ TOY ΣΤΕΦΑΝΟΥ 


59 


Me \ 4 \ \ “Ὁ , > ¥ 
προείπατε. καὶ payy core πολλὰ μὲν ἂν χρήματ᾽ ἔδωκε 81 
Φιλιστίδης ὥστ᾽ ἔχειν Ὠρεὸν, πολλὰ δὲ Κλείταρχος ὧστ᾽ 
ἔχειν Ἐρέτριαν, πολλὰ δ᾽ αὐτὸς ὁ Φίλιππος ὥστε ταῦθ᾽ 
ε ᾽ὔ 3 3 ε ἊΜ ε A x % “A » Ν 3 4 
ὑπάρχειν ἐφ᾽ ὑμᾶς αὑτῷ Kal περὶ τῶν ἄλλων μηδὲν ἐξελέγ- 

3 aA a 507 dots > , A 
χεσθαι pnd ἃ ποιῶν ἠδίκει μηδέν᾽ ἐξετάζειν πανταχοῦ, 5 
οὐδεὶς ἀγνοεῖ, καὶ πάντων ἥκιστα σύ: οἱ γὰρ παρὰ τοῦ 82 
Κλειτάρχου καὶ τοῦ Φιλιστίδου τότε πρέσβεις δεῦρ᾽ ἀφικνού.- 
μενοι παρὰ σοὶ κατέλυον, Αἰσχίνη, καὶ σὺ προὐξένεις αὐτῶν 
a ε \ / ε 3 Ν Ν » ΄, Ν , 
ous ἡ μὲν πόλις ὡς ἐχθροὺς καὶ οὔτε δίκαια οὔτε συμφέροντα 
λέγοντας ἀπήλασεν, σοὶ δ᾽ ἦσαν φίλοι. οὐ τοίνυν ἐπράχθη 5 
τούτων οὐδὲν, ὦ βλασφημῶν περὶ ἐμοῦ καὶ λέγων ὡς σιωπῶ 
253: μὲν λαβὼν βοῶ δ᾽ ἀναλώσας. ἀλλ᾽ οὐ σὺ, ἀλλὰ βοᾷς μὲν 


ἔχων, παύσει δὲ οὐδέποτ᾽ ἐὰν μή σε οὗτοι παύσωσιν ἀτιμώ- 


~~ 


ee a a α΄ “ὅταν 
Ct ee ee --- - 
2 ὰ 


ee -- 


φ 


Io. προείπατε Σ, 1,1; προείπατε αὐτοῖς 1,", vulg. 


§ 81. 1. ayvom. Ar. 2. wpaov (€ over a) = (cf. § 71 ὅ). 4. αὐτὸν 
Σ; αὐτῷ L, vulg.; αὑτῷ Bk. ἐλέγχεσθαι Ar, Y. 

ὃ 82. 2. ἀφικόμενοι At. 3. Aloxivn om. Y. 5. ἀπήλασεν Σ, 
-σεῖ,, vulg.; ἀπήλασαν V6. 7. σὴ δι σύ ye L, vulg. 8. παύσει 2X, L; 


παύση vulg.; παύη V6. 


ἀτιμάσαντες Οἱ (ά corr. to ὦ, γρ). 


§ 81. 3. ὥστε ταῦθ᾽ ὑπάρχειν, that 
he might have these (the two towns under 
the two tyrants) fo depend on, i.e. as ἐπι- 
τειχίσματα ἐπὶ τὴν ᾿Αττικήν (δ 71). 

4. μηδὲν ἐξελέγχεσθαι (sc. subj. αὑ- 
tov): cf. the active constr. in Plat. Ap. 
23 A, ἃ ἂν ἄλλον ἐξελέγξω. 

5. πανταχοῦ, anywhere: cf. πάντων, 
8 5°. 

6. πάντων ἥκιστα σύ: ἃ sudden out- 
burst of personality. 

ὃ 82. 2. adikvovpevor... κατέλνυον : 
the tenses imply that such envoys of the 
tyrants were regular guests of Aeschines. 
These visits were probably connected 
with the embassy sent by Callias of 
Chalcis to Athens in 343—342 B.C. to 
negotiate a treaty (Aesch. 111. g1), which 
alarmed the tyrants. See Hist. ὃ 58, and 
Schaefer 11. 420, 421. 

3. κατέλυον, Jodged (as we say pul up), 
lit. Ze¢ down, originally unharnessed ; cf. 
Od. Iv. 28, καταλύσομεν ὠκέας immovs.— 


᾿ προύξένεις αὐτῶν, you were their πρόξενος : 


this might be metaphorical; but there is 
good reason for thinking that Aeschines 
was the official representative at Athens 
of Oreus, if not of Eretria. See Hist. 
δ. 39, note on Aesch. II. 89, mpogevias 
κατασκενυαζόμενοι. 

ξ. ἀπήλασεν, rejected (i.e. their pro- 
posals). Cf. τι. 6, ΙΧ. 66.—ov¥ τοίνυν... 
οὐδὲν : i.e. nothing of the kind was ever 
successful with me, referring to πολλὰ μὲν 
av χρήματα ἔδωκε κ.τ.λ. in § 81. 

6. ὡς σιωπώ...... ἀναλώσας: quoted 
from memory from the speech of Aesch. 
(218), σὺ δ᾽ οἶμαι λαβὼν μὲν σεσίγηκας, 
ἀναλώσας δὲ κέκραγας. 

7. βοᾷς ἔχων, you keep on shouting: 
cf. Ar. Nub. 509, τί κυπτάζεις ἔχων; 
(M.T. 837). 

8. παύσει... παύσωσιν, you wzll not 
stop unless these judges stop γοιε.---ἀτιμώ- 
σαντες, i.e. by not giving you a fifth of 
their votes, the result of which would be 
the partial ἀτιμία of losing the right to 
bring a similar suit hereafter, with a fine 


83 


5 


84 


10 


60 AHMOZOENOY2 


κι ἂν 9 \ 4 

σαντες τήμερον. στεφανωσάντων τοίνυν ὑμῶν Ef ἐπὶ τού- 
/ Ὧν / > / x 5 Ἂν \ 
τοις τότε, Kal γράψαντος ApioToVLKOV τὰς αὑτᾶς συλλαβὰς 
ο las ‘a τῷ 3 / 
ἅσπερ οὑτοσὶ Κτησιφῶν νῦν γέγραφεν, καὶ ἀναρρηθέντος 
3 “A / ~ ’ μ᾿ / ’ὔ 
ἐν τῷ θεάτρῳ τοῦ στεφάνου.-- καὶ δευτέρου κηρύγματος 
ὃ y 3 > ~ 3 Ve Ν 
ἤδη μοι τούτου γιγνομένου,---οὐτ ἀντειπεν Αἰσχίνης παρὼν 
οὔτε τὸν εἰπόντ᾽ ἐγράψατο.- καί μοι λέγε καὶ τοῦτο τὸ 
ψήφισμα λαβών. 
ΨΗΦΙΣΜΑ. ra 


’ \ ΄ ς / 7 a Ψ , Le 
(Et Χαιρώνδου “Ἡγήμονος ἄρχοντος, γαμηλιῶνος extn am lov- 
A / i , 3 , 3 
τος, φυλῆς πρυτανευούσης Λεοντίδος, ᾿Αριστονικος Φρεάρριος εἶπεν, 
ἐπειδὴ Δημοσθένης Δημοσθένους ἸΤαιανιεὺς πολλὰς καὶ μεγάλας 
χρείας παρέσχηται τῷ δήμῳ τῷ ᾿Αθηναίων καὶ πολλοῖς τῶν 
\ , a Ἐν / 
συμμάχων καὶ πρότερον, Kal ἐν TH παρόντι καιρῷ βεβοήθηκε διὰ 
an t / na > fal > / , b | / 
τῶν ψηφισμάτων, καί τινας τῶν ἐν TH ὐβοίᾳ πόλεων ἠλευθέρωκε, 
\ ἌΣ ΑΓ x a / a? ἢ \ pe \ U 
καὶ διατελεῖ εὔνους ὧν TO δήμῳ τῷ ᾿Αθηναίων, Kal heyel καὶ πράττει 
ee xX / ᾽ \ € / > “ 9 ᾽ὔ \ a BA 
6 τι ἂν δύνηται ἀγαθὸν ὑπέρ τε αὐτῶν ᾿Αθηναίων καὶ τῶν addov 
Ἑλλήνων, δεδόχθαι τῇ βουλῇ καὶ τῷ δήμῳ τῷ ᾿Αθηναίων ἐπαι- 
΄ / / L N a Ὁ 
νέσαι Δημοσθένην Δημοσθένους ἸΙαιανιέα καὶ στεφανωσαι χρυσῷ 
9. τήμερον περὶ τὸ βῆμα Ο. 
ἃ 88. 3. γέγραφενῦν AI. 4. τετάρτου (for δευτέρου) Spengel. 5. 
μένου At. ἀνεῖπεν >! (7 above the line). 


πόντα L, F (yp), ® (yp); ἀντι πόντα A2. 
corr. for τούτου =. 


yevo- 
. τὸν avr’ evrovTa =; ἀντει- 
καὶ (bef. τοῦτο) om. At, B. τοῦτο 


λάκις αὐτὸς στεφανῶσθαι in § 1207, We 
must therefore refer τούτου to the proposal 
of Aristonicus, and understand the clause 


of 1000 drachmas. 
result of this trial. 

§ 83. 2. γράψαντος... γέγραφεν : 1.6. 
the two decrees were essentially identical 


This was actually the 


in form. In § 223 he says of a later 
decree, τὰς αὐτὰς συλλαβὰς καὶ ταὐτὰ 
ῥήματα ἔχει. Even this does not include 
such details as dates, names, etc. 

4. ἐν τῷ θεάτρῳ: this anticipates the 
argument on the place of proclamation 
(§§ 120, 121), and gives a precedent for 
Ctesiphon’s proposal.—8evrépov...rovtov 
γιγνομένου : τούτου is here ambiguous, 
and West. and Bl. think it is corrupt. 
If we refer the words to Ctesiphon’s 
decree (with Blass, who omits τούτου), 
assuming that the crown proposed by 
Demomeles and Hyperides in 338 was 
never proclaimed on account of the battle 
of Chaeronea, we cannot explain τὸ πολ- 


δευτέρου... γιγνομένου to mean that one 
crown had been given to Demosth. in 
the theatre before that of Aristonicus. 
γιγνομένου is imperfect, and we might 


have had δεύτερον κήρυγμα ἤδη μοι τοῦτο. 


ἐγίγνετο, the imperf. implying that he 
was then receiving the distinction for the 
second time. 
Orators (Demosth., end) Aristonicus is 
said to have been the first to propose to 
crown the orator: but the writer may 
have interpreted τούτου in our passage 
wrongly. No solution of the difficulty is 
perfectly satisfactory: Spengel proposes 
to emend δευτέρου to τετάρτου (i.e. δ΄). 

5. παρὼν, though present. 

6. ἐγράψατο: sc. παρανόμων. 


In the Lives of the -Ten_ 


Pee: 


ΠΕΡῚ 


TOY ΣΤΕΦΑΝΟῪΥ 


61 


, \ > an \ / 3 A / 4 
τς στεφάνῳ, καὶ ἀναγορεῦσαι τὸν στέφανον ἐν τῷ θεάτρῳ Διονυσίοις, 


τραγῳδοῖς καινοῖς, τῆς δὲ ἀναγορεύσεως τοῦ στεφάνου ἐπιμεληθῆναι 
254 τὴν πρυτανεύουσαν φυλὴν καὶ τὸν ἀγωνοθέτην. εἶπεν ᾿Αριστόνικος 


ὁ Φρεάρριος. 


' Ἔστιν οὖν ὅστις ὑμῶν οἶδέ τινα αἰσχύνην τῇ πόλει 85 
| A \ A \ ΄, x \ x , 
᾿ς συμβᾶσαν διὰ τοῦτο τὸ ψήφισμα ἢ χλευασμὸν 7} γέλωτα, 


᾿ 
Ι ἃ “A Ὁ » β , θ x 3 Ν al f 
: a νῦν οὗτος Edn συμβήσεσθαι ἂν eyo στεφανῶμαι; 


\ 
και 


\ Ψ a Ν ΄ A Ν ᾽ , 
μὴν ὅταν ἢ νέα καὶ γνώριμα πᾶσι τὰ πράγματα, ἐάν τε 


/ ¥ 3 Ἂς / Ν / \ > ΄ 
ο΄ φαίνομαι τοίνυν ἐγὼ χάριτος τετυχηκὼς τότε, καὶ οὐ μέμψεως 


: 2Q\ ΄ὕ 
} οὐδὲ τιμωριᾶς. 


SO, τ 


καλῶς ἔχῃ, χάριτος τυγχάνει, ἐάν θ᾽ ὡς ἑτέρως, τιμωρίας. ς 


Οὐκοῦν μέχρι μὲν τῶν χρόνων ἐκείνων ἐν οἷς ταῦτ᾽ 86 

ἐπράχθη, πάντ᾽ ἀνωμολόγημαι τὰ ἄριστα πράττειν τῇ πόλει, 
wn lal 7 > : \ ~ 

τῷ νικᾶν oT ἐβουλεύεσθέὲ λέγων καὶ γράφων, τῷ KaTaTpa- 


CE dat 


8 85. 1. τῇ πόλει συμβᾶσαν =, L, At, Y; συμβ- τῇ πόλ. B, vulg. ἂς 1G 
ΟἹ, dv Σ,1,, V6; ἐὰν vulg. 6. τότε (corr. for ὃ) Σ. 
§ 86. 2. πάντας ἀνωμολ. τοὺς χρόνους = (yp), L, vulg.; τοὺς χρόνους om. J; 


πάντ᾽ (for πάντας) West., Lips., πάντως Dobr., 


= (yp), ® (yp). 


Vom. πράττειν καὶ λέγειν 


| § 85. 2. συμβᾶσαν -- ὅτι συνέβη : 

} cf. φαίνομαι τετυχηκὼς (6). 

3. ἔφη συμβήσεσθαι: see Aesch. 231, 

ὅταν τὸν τοιοῦτον ἄνθρωπον στεφανῶτε, 

οὐκ οἴεσθε ἐν ταῖς τῶν ᾿Ελλήνων δόξαις 

συρίττεσθαι; 

' 5. ὡς ἑτέρως, otherwise, in the other 

way (opposed to καλῶς), used to avoid 
᾿ς κακῶς. This is the adverb of τὸ ἕτερον, 

as ὡσαύτως (ws αὔτως) of τὸ αὐτό, and ὡς 


᾿ς ἀληθῶς of τὸ ἀληθές. We find also ὡς 
᾿ ἐτύμως, Aeschyl. Eum. 534, ὡς ἐτητύμως, 
& Soph. ΕἸ. 14525 and ws παραπλησίως, 
Hat. vit. r19!. This is the explanation 
ny of Fox, Kranzrede, pp. 298, 299, in 
_ Which West. and Bl. concur. See XXII. 
12, ἀγαθὰ ἢ θάτερα, ἵνα μηδὲν εἴπω 
2 φλαῦρον, which shows the euphemistic 
/ character of ws érépws here. 

§ 86. 2. πάντ᾽... πράττειν, that 7 
did everything that was best. It is difh- 
cult to choose even the most probable 
reading here. Both πάντας (Z) and 
πάντας τοὺς χρόνους are objectionable, 


it 


is 
q 


and we seem compelled to decide be- 
tween the conjectures πάντ᾽ and πάντως. 
We have πάντως ἐξετάζειν in ὃ 2561, acc. 
to Preuss (Index) the only case of πάντως 
in Demosth. This would connect τῴ 
vikdy etc. more closely with ἀνωμολό- 
γημαι; but πάντα τὰ ἄριστα makes a 
most natural object to πράττειν .---πράτ- 
rev is imperfect (for ἔπραττον). On the 
contrary, νικᾶν, καταπραχθῆναι, and ye- 
νέσθαι are distinguished only like ordinary 
present and aorist infinitives (M.T. 87, 
96). This is always the case with these 
tenses of the infinitive with the article, 
except in occasional examples of oratio 
obligua (M.T. 794). Madvig’s rule (Synt. 
§ 172 4), that the aor. infin. with both 
the article and a subject is always. past 
except in purpose clauses, cannot be 
maintained. It fails in § 33%, mpd τοῦ 
τοὺς Φωκέας ἀπολέσθαι, and in Thuc. vil. 
68!*)15 (τὸ ἀπελθεῖν and τὸ κολασθῆναι). 
πεποιῆσθαι (6) is the regular perfect (M.T. 
102, 100). 


CHLAAL 


62 AHMOZOENOY2 


ἰοὺ ἢ / Ν / 5 3 “ A“ Ν 
χθῆναι τὰ γραφέντα καὶ στεφάνους ἐξ αὐτῶν τῇ λει καὶ 
ς ἐμοὶ καὶ πᾶσιν γενέσθαι, τῷ θυσίας τοῖς θεοῖς καὶ προσόδους 
ὡς ἀγαθῶν τούτων ὄντων ὑμᾶς πεποιῆσθαι. 
87 Ἐπειδὴ τοίνυν ἐκ τῆς Εὐβοίας ὁ Φίλιππος ὑφ᾽ ὑμῶν 
3 ’, A \ Ψ a Ν » Ν κι , 
ἐξηλάθη,. -τοῖς μὲν ὁπλοις, TH δὲ πολιτείᾳ καὶ τοῖς ψηφί- 
an / > “ Ψ 
σμασι, κἂν διαρραγῶσί τινες τούτων, ὑπ᾽ ἐμοῦ,---ετερον 
κατὰ τῆς πόλεως ἐπιτειχισμὸν ἐζήτει. ὁρῶν δ᾽ ὅτι σίτῳ 
/ > , / uA a3, 43 4 »» 
ς πάντων ἀνθρώπων πλείστῳ χρώμεθ᾽ ἐπεισάκτῳ, βουλόμενος 
τῆς σιτοπομπίας κύριος γενέσθαι, παρελθὼν ἐπὶ Θρᾷκης 


/ / μή «ες ὁ: Ν Ν la 9 ahd 
Βυζαντίους, συμμάχους ὄντας αὐτῷ, TO μὲν πρῶτον ἠξίου 
τοῖξ θεοῖς after προσό- 


5. πᾶσιν Σ, L', Α:2; πᾶσιν ὑμῖν vulg. γίνεσθαι At. ᾿ 


aoe 


δους AI. 6. wsom. 1.1. 
§ 87. I. 


an 


ὑφ᾽ ἡμῶν (corr. for ὑμῶν, Vom.) ἐξηλάθη τοῖς μὲν ὅπλοις (ὑφ᾽ ὑμῶν 


added later over ὅπλοις) Σ (ὑφ᾽ ἡμῶν dotted for erasure); ἀφ᾽ ὑμῶν ἐξηλ. τοῖς 
μ. ὅπλοις L, same w. ὑφ᾽ ὑμῶν A2, in both ὑφ᾽ ὑμῶν added after ὅπλοις; ὑφ᾽ ὑμῶν 


μὲν ἐξηλ. τ. ὅπλ. V3 ἐξηλ. τοῖς μὲν ὅπλ. ὑφ᾽ ὑμῶν At, B, vulg. 6. 
g 


>, L, Y, F, ®, Ar. 2; σιτοπομπείας vulg. 
vulg.; avrox =, αὑτῷ Bk. 


σιτοπομπίας 


7. ὄντας συμμ. Νό. αὐτῷ 1,, 


4. τὰ γραφέντα--ἃ ἔγραψα; see note 
on ὃ 564.—kal ἐμοὶ καὶ πᾶσιν repeats the 
idea of τῇ πόλει. 

5. προσόδους, processions: cf. § 216°. 

8 87. 2. Tots μὲν ὅπλοις, J mean, by 
arms, added, as if by afterthought, to 
limit ὑφ᾽ ὑμῶν, as πολιτείᾳ and ψηφίσμασι 
limit ὑπ᾽ ἐμοῦ. The interruption is col- 
loquial and designedly spontaneous. See 
note on ὃ 1215, τῶν δ᾽ ἀφαιρῶν μέρη. 

3. Kav διαρραγῶσι: see § 217. 

4. ἐπιτειχισμὸν, i.e. Byzantium, as a 
point from which to threaten Athens: 
see note on ὃ 712. —oltw ἐπεισάκτῳ : the 
same words are found in xx. 31, where 
it is said that the grain from the Euxine 
was about half of the whole amount im- 
ported by Athens. See Sandys’s notes 
on XX. 31—33- ‘The thin soil of Attica 
(τὸ λεπτόγεων, Thuc. 1. 2) could not 
supply grain enough for the population, 
even in the best seasons, and the fruitful 
shores of the Euxine were the most im- 
portant sources of supply. . Hence it 
would have been fatal to Athens to have 
the Hellespont and the Bosporus in 
hostile hands (cf. §§ 241, 301). Boeckh 
estimates the grain annually consumed 


in Attica at about 3,400,000 μέδιμνοι 
(5,100,000 bushels), of which only 
2,400,000 μέδιμνοι could be raised at 
home. See Staatsh. d. Ath. Book 1. Ch. 
1s. Strabo (p. 311) says that in the 
Tauric Chersonese (the Crimea) the seed 
produced thirty-fold. See Hdt. vit. 147 
for the characteristic story of Xerxes 
complacently viewing the ships loaded 
with grain sailing by Abydos to Aegina 
and Peloponnesus to supply zs army. 

6. παρελθὼν ἐπὶ Θράκης : this prob- 
ably refers to the advance of Philip to 
the siege of Perinthus in 340, when he 
protected his fleet in its passage through 
the Hellespont by marching an army 
through the Chersonese. The appeal to 
Byzantium, as an ally, to help him in his 
coming war with Athens was perhaps 
sent from Perinthus, which he besieged 
unsuccessfully before he attacked Byzan- 
tium. See Hist. δὲ 66, 67. 


hostilities against Byzantium by Philip 
are mentioned a year earlier (see VIII. 66, 
IX. 35); but the present passage must 
refer to the time immediately before the 
war with Athens. 

7. Bvfavriovs: with both ἠξίου and 


Threats of. 


3 ,ὔ 3 Ψ 
᾿ ἐπιστήσας ἐπολιόρκει. 
᾿ς προσῆκε 


| = 
| an 


ν 
(255 απασιν. 


ΠΕΡΙ TOY ΣΤΕΦΑΝΟΥ 63 


᾿ ἮΝ Ν N ε κα ,ὕ ε > > ¥ 50» 
συμπολεμεῖν τὸν πρὸς ὑμᾶς πόλεμον, ὡς δ᾽ οὐκ ἤθελον οὐδ 
ἐπὶ τούτοις ἔφασαν τὴν συμμαχίαν πεποιῆσθαι, λέγοντες 
> ae , , Ν A , \ , > 
ἀληθῆ, χάρακα βαλόμενος πρὸς TH πόλει καὶ μηχανήματ᾽ 10 
τούτων δὲ γιγνομένων ὅ τι μὲν 88 
πριεῖν ὑμᾶς, οὐκ ἐπερωτήσω:" ἡ Χο γάρ ἐστιν 
ἀλλὰ τίς nv ὁ βοηθήσας τοῖς “Βυζαντίοις καὶ 


, > 3 ᾿ ,ὔ ε 4 Ν ε 4 5 
σώσας αὐτούς; τίς ὁ κωλύσας τὸν Βλλήσποντον ἀλλοτριω- 
Lal \ n~ » wn 
θῆναι κατ᾽ ἐκείνους τοὺς χρόνους; ὑμεῖς, ἄνδρες ᾿Αθηναῖοι. 5 


j 
Ν 3 ε “A 4 / ‘\ / ’ 
: τὸ δ᾽ ὑμεῖς ὅταν λέγω, THY πόλιν λέγω. 


τίς δ᾽ ὃ τῇ πόλει 


/ * / \ # \ ε “A ε Ν 3 Ν 
λέγων καὶ γράφων καὶ πράττων καὶ ἁπλῶς ἑαυτὸν εἰς τὰ 


πράγματ᾽ ἀφειδῶς διδούς; ἐγώ. 


i : AL. Puss 
" λα αὶ fom 


ie vulg. 
(cat for cac) V6. 
haf § 88. 2. 

| οὐκ ἐπερωτήσω Σ, L, A2, ® 
«5s @ div dpes vulg. ; ; 9om. 2, L. 6. 
ΕἾ V6. 8. 


προσῆκε a ; προσήκει Σ, L. 
(yp); οὐκέτ᾽ ἐρωτήσω vulg. 4- 
ὅταν λέγω 


δούς 2, L, vulg., Bk.; διδούς Ar, most edd. 


§ 89. 2. οὐκέτ᾽ Σ, L, Ar; οὐκ vulg. 
δεῖ om. O. μαθεῖν ὑμᾶς At. 


ἀλλὰ μὴν ἡλίκα ταῦτ᾽ 89 


ὠφέλησεν ἅπαντας, οὐκέτ᾽ ἐκ τοῦ λόγου δεῖ μαθεῖν, ἀλλ᾽ 
ἔργῳ πεπείρασθε- ὁ γὰρ τότε ἐνστὰς πόλεμος ἄνευ τοῦ 


10. χάρακα Σ, 1.1, Harpocr.; χαράκωμα = (yp), At; χαρακώματα 1,2 (with ἀ7-), 
βαλόμενος Σ, L, vulg.; βαλλόμενος Σ (yp); βουλόμενος At. Il. 


ἐπιστῆσαι 
ὑμᾶς Σ, L, Ar, Φὺὶ ἡμᾶς vulg. 
ἀπαλλοτριωθῆναι At. 


Σ, 1,; ὅταν εἴπω vulg. 7. αὑτὸν 


τοῦ λόγου Σ, L, Α2; λόγου vulg. 


Bd fe 
᾿ ἐπολιόρκει (1 1).---ουμμάχους: after Βγ- 
zantium left the Athenian alliance in the 


ΔΊ (xv. 3, IX. 35). But now she had been 
; R Εν: into friendship and alliance with 


‘for help (Hist. § 63). 
8. οὐκ ἤθελον οὐδ᾽ ἔφασαν, refused 
and dented. 

Io. χάρακα, here a falisade, generally 
a pale or pole: see Harpocr. χάρακα" 
Λημοσθένης τὸ χαράκωμα ὃ περιεβάλ- 
ντό τινες στρατοπέδῳ ἐπὶ σωτηρίᾳ. 566 
4 + 23, χαρακώματα καὶ τείχη καὶ τάφροι. 

ell ἐπιστήσας: cf. IX. 17, 


I. ὅ τι προσῆκε: the question 
ready asked in 88 63, 66, 69, 71. 
2, οὐκ ἐπερωτήσω, J well not repeat 


the question: the common reading οὐκέτ᾽ 
ἐρωτήσω gives nearly the same sense. 

3. τίς ἦν ὁ βοηθήσας; like who was 
the one who did it? (M.T. 41). 

7. δλέγων.... διδούς; these participles 
are imperfect, and so contrasted with the 
preceding βοηθήσας etc. Few editors 
venture to accept δούς for διδούς, though 
it is supported by = and L. Vomel says: 
‘*Nec puto Demosthenis aures tolerasse 
continuatas syllabas—éés δούς. Sed in 
talibus nihil affirmarim.” The aorist 
δούς after the preceding imperfects would 
doubtless add force, like ὃς ἔδωκε for ds 
ἐδίδου. But how about the sound ἢ 

8 89. 2. ἐκ τοῦ λόγου, in the familiar 
antithesis to ἔργῳ. 

3. ὁ ἐνστὰς, which broke out (ds ἐνέ- 
στη): cf. ἐνειστήκει, was upon us, § 139°. 
—dvev, besides (without reckoning): cf. 
[X11l.] 7, ἄνευ τοῦ συμφέρειν, and XXIII. 
112, ἄνευ τούτου. 


. 


5 


Io 


64 ΔΗΛΛΟΣΘΕΝΟΥΣ 


καλὴν δόξαν ἐ ἐνεγκεῖν ἐν πᾶσι τοῖς κατὰ τὸν βίον i ih ak 
pous καὶ εὐωνοτέροις διῆγεν ὑμᾶς τῆς νῦν εἰρήνης, ἣν οὗτοι 
κατὰ τῆς πατρίδος τηροῦσιν οἱ χρηστοὶ ἐπὶ τὰς μελλούσαις 
ἐλπίσιν, ὧν διαμάρτοιεν, καὶ μετάσχοιεν ὧν ὑμεῖς οἱ τὰ 
βέλτιστα βουλόμενοι τοὺς θεοὺς αἰτεῖτε, μὴ μεταδοῖεν ὑ ὑμῖν 
ὧν αὐτοὶ προήρηνται. λέγε δ᾽ αὐτοῖς καὶ τοὺς τῶν Βυζαντίων 


στεφάνους καὶ τοὺς τῶν Περινθίων, οἷς ἐστεφάνουν ἐ ΕΝ τούτων 


τὴν πόλιν. 


5. καὶ εὐων. om. A2. 
6. μέλλουσιν (ats over w) Σ. νὰ 


8. μὴ μεταδοῖεν Σ; μηδὲ μεταδοῖεν L, vulg. 
τοὺς τῶν Bug. 2, L, Y, Ar. 2; τοὺς ae Ilep. same, with F, ®; 


over 7). Q, 10. 
τῶν (in both) om. vulg. 


διῆγεν Σ, L; διήγαγεν vulg. 
καὶ μετάσχοιεν ΣΑΙ καὶ ph μετάσχοιεν vulg. 


ὑμᾶς vulg.; ἡμᾶς Ar. 


ὑμῖν Σ, L (ἡ over v); ἡμῖν B, F (ὑ 


4. ἐν πᾶσι... διῆγεν ὑμᾶς, saw you 
supplied (carried you through) with all 
the necessaries of life in greater abundance 
and cheaper. 

5. τῆς νῦν εἰρήνης: τῆς ἐπὶ ᾿Αλεξάν- 
δρου (Schol.), the peace of Demades, 
under which Athens had been living since 
Chaeronea.—jWv... τηροῦσιν : the Mace- 
donian party had been strong enough to 
prevent Athens from openly helping 
Thebes in her revolt in 335 B.C., or the 
Peloponnesians under Agis in 330. See 
Grote XII. 44, 59; 380—383. 

6. χρηστοὶ: cf. the sarcastic χρηστέ, 
§ 5183.- ἐπὶ... ἐλπίσιν, zz (with a view 
to) their hopes of future gain: ἐλπίζουσι 
γὰρ ἐπανελθόντα Tov ᾿Αλεξάνδρον ἀπὸ τῶν 
Περσῶν μεγάλα αὐτοῖς χαρίζεσθαι ὡς προ- 
δόταις (Schol.). 

7,8. καὶ μετάσχοιεν... μὴ μεταδοῖεν : 
this reading of = gives an entirely different 
sense from that of the common text, kal 
μὴ μετάσχοιεν... μηδὲ μεταδοῖεν. The 
meaning is, May they fail in these their 
hopes; and may they rather be allowed to 
share with you patriots in the blessings 
for which you pray, that they may not 
involve you in the calamities which would 
result from their policy. Itis impossible, 
I think, to take μὴ μεταδοῖεν as a mere 
continuation of the wish of μετάσχοιεν : 
the asyndeton would be too harsh. M7 
μεταδοῖεν must be a final clause, assimi- 
lated to the optative μετάσχοιεν (M.T. 
182), as in ἔλθοι ὅπως γένοιτο λυτήριος, 


Aeschyl. Eum. 297, and γένοιτο... «ἵν᾽ αἱ 
Μυκῆναι γνοῖεν, Soph. Phil. 324. For 
12 final optatives and τὸ subjunctives 
after wishing optatives (all poetic) see 
M.T. 181. I know no other case in 
prose; but I know no other final clause 
(of any kind) depending on a wishing 
optative in prose, which is hardly strange. 
But an optative in a condition is as good 
for our purpose as one in a wish; and we 
have in Plato Rep. 370 Ὁ, εἰ βουκόλους 
προσθεῖμεν, ἵνα... ἔχοιεν Bots, and Xen. 
Cyr. I. 6, 22, εἰ πείσαις ἐπαινεῖν σε πολ- 
λοὺς, ὅπως δόξαν λάβοις : see other cases 
in M.T. 180%. Μή introducing a pure 
final clause is a gradually disappearing 
construction. In epic and lyric poetry 
the proportion of this to that of the final 
particles with μή is 131 : §0; in tragedy 
it is 76:59; and in Attic prose it is 
almost wholly confined to Plato (24) and 
Xenophon (12). In the Attic orators 
there are only four cases of simple μή, 
two of which (not counting the present 
one) are in Demosthenes: see XIX. 225, 
μή τις ἴδῃ, and XXXVIII. 26, μή με φῶσιν. 
See Weber, Absichtssatze, pp. 184, 221, 
245—247. Those who are not satisfied 
with μὴ μεταδοῖεν in this sense must re- 
turn to μηδὲ μεταδοῖεν as a wish. 

9. ὧν αὐτοὶ προήρηνται, 1.6. their 
προαίρεσις : τῆς δουλείας δηλονότι (Schol.). 
-- τοὺς... Περινθίων, i.e. the crowns voted 
by these towns and sent to Athens as 
marks of honour. 


| ΠΈΡΙ TOY STEPANOY 65 
" 

i ΨΗΦΙΣΜΑ BYZANTION. 

" [Ἐπὶ ἱερομνάμονος Βοσπορίχω Δαμάγητος ἐν τᾷ ἁλίᾳ ἔλεξεν, 
| ἐκ τᾶς βωλᾶς λαβὼν ῥάτραν, ἐπειδὴ ὁ δᾶμος ὁ ᾿Αθαναίων ἔν τε 


᾿ς γχοῖς προγεγεναμένοις καιροῖς εὐνοέων διατελέει Βυζαντίοις καὶ τοῖς 
’ συμμάχοις καὶ συγγενέσι Περινθίοις καὶ πολλὰς καὶ μεγάλας 
ο΄ χρείας παρέσχηται, ἔν τε τῷ παρεστακότι καιρῷ Φιλίσπω τῶ 

Μακεδόνος ἐπιστρατεύσαντος ἐπὶ τὰν χώραν καὶ τὰν πόλιν ἐπ᾽ 
256 ἀναστάσει Βυζαντίων καὶ Τ]ερινθίων καὶ τὰν χώραν δαίοντος καὶ 

δενδροκοπέοντος, βοηθήσας πλοίοις ἑκατὸν καὶ εἴκοσι καὶ σίτῳ καὶ 
ο΄ βέλεσι καὶ ὁπλίταις ἐξείλετο ἀμὲ ἐκ τῶν μεγάλων κινδύνων καὶ 
τ΄ ἀποκατέστασε τὰν πάτριον πολιτείαν καὶ τὼς νόμως καὶ τὼς 
᾿ς τχάφως, δεδόχθαι TO δάμῳ τῷ Βυζαντίων καὶ Περινθίων ᾿Αθαναίοις 
᾿ς δόμεν ἐπιγαμίαν, πολιτείαν; ἔγκτασιν γᾶς καὶ οἰκιᾶν, προεδρίαν ἐν 
τοῖς ἀγῶσι, πόθοδον ποτὶ τὰν βωλὰν καὶ τὸν δᾶμον πράτοις μετὰ 
τὰ ἱερὰ, καὶ τοῖς κατοικέειν ἐθέλουσι τὰν πόλιν ἀλειτουργήτοις 
_ ἦμεν πασᾶν τᾶν λειτουργιᾶν: στᾶσαι δὲ καὶ εἰκόνας τρεῖς ἑκκαιδε- 
1 καπάχεις ἐν τῷ Βοσπορείῳ, στεφανούμενον τὸν δᾶμον τὸν ᾿Αθαναίων 
ὑπὸ τῶ δάμω τῶ Βυζαντίων καὶ Περινθίων: ἀποστεῖλαι δὲ καὶ 
θεωρίας ἐς τὰς ἐν τᾷ ᾿Ελλάδι παναγύριας, Ἴσθμια καὶ Νέμεα καὶ 


| Ὀλύμπια καὶ Πύθια, καὶ ἀνακαρῦξαι τὼς στεφάνως ois ἐστεφάνω- 
iq . ¢ an 4 / ς aa. Φ la “ bd / ed 
᾿ς ται ὁ δᾶμος ὁ ᾿Αθαναίων ὑφ᾽ ἡμῶν, ὅπως ἐπιστέωνται οἱ EXXaves 
᾿ / Ε / 3 \ \ \ / \ / > 

᾿ς τᾶν te ᾿Αθαναίων ἀρετὰν καὶ τὰν Βυζαντίων καὶ Ἰ]ερινθίων εὐχα- 
᾿ς ριστίαν.] 

Δ 4 \ Ν Ν “ 3 4 / φ / 
έγε καὶ TOUS παρὰ τῶν ἐν Χερρονήσῳ στεφάνους. 


ry 


WH®ISMA XEPPONHSITON. 


lal an a lal , 
[Χερρονησιτῶν οἱ κατοικοῦντες Σηστὸν, ᾿λεοῦντα, Μάδυτον, 
4] 
Αλωπεκόννησον, erepavovc ᾿Αθηναίων τὴν βουλὴν καὶ τὸν 


ae Pi cana 


; ἱδρύονται καὶ δήμου ᾿Αθηναίων, ὅτι πάντων μεγίστου ἀγαθῶν 
παραίτιος γέγονε Χερρονησίταιξ, ἐξελόμενος ἐκ τῆς Φιλίππου καὶ 


wre 


\ 
| ἀποδοὺς τὰς πατρίδας, τοὺς νόμους, τὴν ἐλευθερίαν, τὰ ἱερά. Kal 
‘ , A r A 5 a \ a 
᾿ ἐν τῷ μετὰ ταῦτα αἰῶνι παντὶ οὐκ ἐλλείψει εὐχαριστῶν καὶ ποιῶν 


AevTnpio.| 


8 92. 1. λέγε... στεφάνους om. O. 


90 


IO 


91 


92 


δ ον χρυσῷ στεφάνῳ ἀπὸ ταλάντων ἑξήκοντα, καὶ χάριτος βωμὸν ς 


π Ὁ a ? / bd nA tal 
ὃ τι ἂν δύνηται ἀγαθόν. ταῦτα ἐψηφίσαντο ἐν τῷ κοινῷ βου- το 


66 AHMOZOENOY2 


la ; ἂς / las 

93 οὐκοῦν οὐ μόνον τὸ Χερρόνησον καὶ Βυζάντιον cord, 
ἴω 4 4 

οὐδὲ τὸ κωλῦσαι τὸν Ἑλλήσποντον ὑπὸ Φιλίππῳ γενέσθαι 


ἴω e ’ ee 
τότε, οὐδὲ τὸ τιμᾶσθαι THY πόλιν ἐκ τούτων Ἢ TPOALPETLS 
an » i 
ib; ἐμὴ καὶ ἡ πολιτεία διεπράξατο, ἀλλὰ καὶ πᾶσιν ἔδειξεν 
Peete Sapte tera ει ΤῊ ee vals , 
ς ἀνθρώποις τήν τε τῆς πόλεως καλοκαγαθίαν καὶ τὴν Φιλίππου 
wn 4 ῪΜ 
κακίαν. ὁ μὲν γὰρ σύμμαχος ὧν τοῖς Βυζαντίοις πολιορκῶν 
ae ΩΝ > "x ἊΝ Xx 
αὐτοὺς ἑωρᾶτο ὑπὸ πάντων, οὗ TL γένοιτ ἂν αἰσχίιον 7) 
͵ ε “A NA ε Ν ’ λλὰ Ν δί 3 
94 μιαρώτερον; υὕμεις ὁ, OL Και μεμψάμενουι πολλὰ καὶ οὐκᾶι 
425 3 ε Lal 5 
ἂν ἐκείνοις εἰκότως περὶ ὧν ἠγνωμονήκεσαν εἰς ὑμᾶς ἐν 
lal A > \ 
τοῖς ἔμπροσθεν χρόνοις, οὐ μόνον οὐ MYNTLKAKOUITES οὐδὲ 
eo? Ν LO ’ὔ Ἰλλὰ Ν ΄ : 3 4 0 : 
προϊέμενοι τοὺς ἀδικουμένους ἀλλὰ καὶ σῴζοντες ἐφαίνεσθε, 
3 ὡς ΄ x \ , 3 a θ a Ν νῷ | 
ς ἐξ ὧν δόξαν, εὔνοιαν παρὰ πάντων ἐκτάσθε. καὶ μὴν ὅτι 
\ \ 3 , 3 a las λ he 4 
μὲν πολλοὺς ἐστεφανώκατ᾽ ἤδη τῶν πολιτευομενῶν ἅπαντες 


ἴσασι" Sv ὅντινα δ᾽ ἄλλον ἡ πόλις ἐστεφάνωται, σύμβουλον 


4 Kees \ S Vs ee he aN a 3 a » 
λέγω καὶ ῥήτορα, πλὴν OL ἐμέ, OVO ἂν Els ELTEW ἐχόοί. 


β 8 98. 4,5. ἔδειξεν ἀνθρ. Σ, L, At, Y, ®; ἀνθρ. ἔδειξε vulg. 6. μὲν γὰρ 
>, 11, Az, B (yp); μέν γε = (vp), 1.5, vulg. σύμμαχος ὧν D, Li, A*; Φίλιππο καὶ 
over σύμμαχος 12; φίλος καὶ σύμμαχος ὧν Σ (yp), vulg.; φίλος ὧν καὶ σύμμαχος 
AI. 7. καὶ (for ἢ) A2, V6. 

894. 5. δόξαν εὔνοιαν vulg., Lips., Bl.; (with comma) Vém., West.; δόξαν καὶ 
εὔνοιαν only ἡ, Bk.; δόξαν εὔνοιαν τιμὴν At. 6. μὲν πολλοὺς 2, L, Ar; πολλ. 


μὲν vulg. πολιτευομένων Σ, L, B, vulg.; πεπολιτευμένων F. ἅπαντες add. 
over line 2. 8. Aéyw om. Y}. 
. 
898. 1. οὐκοῦν introduces the con- μνησικακήσειν in the oath of oblivion 
clusion to which the decrees point. after the restoration in 403 B.C., Xen. 
2. οὐδὲ (sc. μόνον): cf. οὐδὲ, § 24. Hell..dk. 14,5433 


1] 


3. ἡ προαίρεσις καὶ ἡ πολιτεία : cf. 
§§ 2924, 3177. In § 192° we have τὴν 
προαίρεσιν τῆς πολιτείας in nearly the 
same sense. 

6. σύμμαχος ov: cf. ὃ 87’. 

894. 1. of μεμψάμενοι ἂν -- οἵ ἐμέμ- 
ψασθε ἄν.-- πολλὰ καὶ δίκαι᾽ ἐκείνοις : 
cf. Ar. Plut. 8, Λοξίᾳ μέμψιν δικαίαν 
μέμφομαι ταύτην. 

2. ὧν ἠγνωμονήκεσαν εἰς ὑμᾶς : cf. 
οἷς εὐτυχήκεσαν, ὃ 18°. This refers to 
the conduct of Byzantium in the Social 
war: see note on § 87’, and Hist. §§ 2, 
63. 

3. μνησικακοῦντες : remembering old 
grudges (maliciously): cf. § g9*. See μὴ 


5. δόξαν, εὔνοιαν: the asyndeton is 
more emphatic than δόξαν καὶ εὔνοιαν : 
see 88 9645, 234°, and XIX. 100 and 220. 
(See West.) 

6. τῶν πολιτευόμενων, your public 
men: the other reading τῶν πεπολιτευ- 


μένων might be neut. pass. (as in 88 8?, | 


1175) and causal. 


7. ovpPovdrov...pyTopa: Phocion as” 


general was probably one of the excep- 


tions here implied (West.); see XXII. 72, _ 


for the inscription on a crown at Athens, 
Εὐβοεῖς ἐλευθερωθέντες ἐστεφάνωσαν τὸν 
δῆμον, which Blass refers to the famous 
expedition to Euboea under Timotheus 
in 357B.c. See § 99° 


TEP! TOY STEPANOY 67 


. Ἵνα τοίνυν καὶ τὰς βλασφημίας ἃ ἃς κατὰ τῶν Εὐβοέων 95 
— 

Kal TOV Βυζαντίων ἐποιήσατο, εἴ τι δυσχερὲς αὐτοῖς ἐπέ. 

MPAkTO πρὸς ὑμᾶς ὑπομιμνήσκων, συκοφαντίας οὔσας 

ἐπιδείξω μὴ μόνον τῷ ψευδεῖς εἶναι (τοῦτο μὲν γὰρ ὑπάρχειν 

ε ἊΝ 3 / ε ῪΜᾺ 5 \ \ “Ὁ > Ν 4 > » 

ὑμᾶς εἰδότας ἡγοῦμαι), ἀλλὰ Kal TO, εἰ τὰ μάλιστ᾽ ἦσαν s 

ἀληθεῖς, οὕτως ὡς ἐγὼ κέχρημαι τοῖς πράγμασι συμφέρειν 

, a an a 

χρήσασθαι, ἕν ἢ δύο βούλομαι τῶν Kal” ὑμᾶς πεπραγμένων 
la - ,7ὔ ~~ \ ἮΝ. 5 PA \ Ν 

καλῶν τῇ πόλει διεξελθεῖν, καὶ ταῦτ᾽ ἐν βραχέσι: καὶ γὰρ 


“ἄνδρα ἰδίᾳ καὶ πόλιν κοινῇ πρὸς τὰ κάλλιστα τῶν ὕπαρ-͵ 
χόντων ἀεὶ δεῖ πειρᾶσθαι τὰ λοιπὰ πράττειν. ὑμεῖς τοίνυν, 96 


ἄνδρες ᾿Αθηναῖοι, Λακεδαιμονίων γῆς καὶ θαλάττης ἀρχόντων 


cited to show that the considerate treat- 
ment of Euboea and Byzantium was in 
accordance with the traditional policy of 
Athens. 

8 95. 1. tds βλασφημίας refers to 
the long tirade of Aeschines (11. 85—93) 
against the proceedings in Euboea in 
_ 341—340. There is nothing in the speech 
of Aesch., as it now stands, relating to 
the help sent to Byzantium. 

ο΄ 2. δυσχερὲς, zPleasant, is a euphem- 
_ ism adapted to the changed state of 
feeling towards Euboea and Byzantium 
mesince 343; 

4. ὑπάρχειν ὑμᾶς εἰδότας, chat you 
may be presumed to know: cf. § 2287. 
This is not a mere expanded εἰδέναι (as 
if εἶναι were used), but we have the 
- fundamental idea of ὑπάρχω added: see 
note on ὃ 1°. In line 9, τῶν ὑπαρχόντων 
q applies to the glories of our ancestors as 
‘material stored up for us to emulate. 
«+5. τῷ, συμφέρειν, like τῴ ψευδεῖς 
| εἶναι, expresses means.—el...qjoav, sz 
| evant (not essent): cf. § 126. For ra 
μάλιστα see § 217. 

7. χρήσασθαι, deal with, manage.— 
' ΨΚ καθ᾽ ὑμᾶς, of the events of your time, 
| beginning with the Corinthian war of 


ὃ 95. 5. εἰδέναι (dotted for erasure) under ἡγοῦμαι Σ, same (εἰδέναι erased) L. 
6. συμφέρει VO. 7. χρῆσθαι Ar, O. Io. πειρᾶσθαι τὰ λοιπὰ Σ, L; τὰ 
. λοιπὰ πειρ. vulg. 
§ 96. 2. ἄνδρες Σ, L; ὦ ἄνδρες vulg. 
§§ 95—101. Historical parallels are 395 8.0. This war was now 65 years 


old; but there were probably old men in 
the immense audience who distinctly re- 
membered it and who would be pleased to 
have it spoken of as zz their day. Still, 
he feels that these earlier events hardly 
fall within his limit of καθ᾽ ὑμᾶς, for he 
says τών τότε ᾿Αθηναίων in ὃ 96’, directly 
after ἐξήλθετε εἰς ‘ANlaprov, and οἱ ὑμέ- 
τεροι πρόγονοι, followed by ὑμεῖς οἱ πρεσ- 
βύτεροι, in ὃ 983. 

9. ἄνδρα ἰδίᾳ... πράττειν : this belongs 
(acc. to BI.) to the class of γνῶμαι discuss- 
ed by Aristotle, Rhet. 11. 21, 15: ἔχουσι 
δ᾽ (yv@pmat) els rods λόγους βοήθειαν μεγά- 
λην, μίαν μὲν διὰ τὴν φορτικότητα τῶν 
ἀκροατῶν" χαίρουσι γὰρ ἐάν τις καθόλου 
λέγων ἐπιτύχῃ τῶν δοξῶν ἃς ἐκεῖνοι κατὰ 
μέρος éxovow.—mpos, with reference (or 
regard) to: cf. τὸ πρός τι, Aristotle’s 
category of relation. 

το. τὰ λοιπὰ (cf. § 271°), opposed to 
τῶν ὑπαρχόντων. 

896. 2. Λακεδαιμονίων. . ἀρχόντων : 
after the Peloponnesian War, Lysander 
established in most of the conquered 
towns, and even in some which were 
previously friendly to Sparta, a Spartan 
governor (ἁρμοστής) with a military force 
(φρουρά), and a board of ten citizens of 


§——2 


68 : AHMOZOENOY2 


\ ᾿ la > fal “ 

καὶ τὰ κύκλῳ τῆς ᾿Αττικῆς κατεχόντων ἁρμοσταις καὶ 
“κ᾿ ΕΥ , Ν Ἃ ν . x 
φρουραῖς, Εὔβοιαν, Τάναγραν, τὴν Βοιωτίαν ἅπασαν, Μέ- 

» / Ν »y fa > “ > ἊΝ 
5yapa, Αἴγιναν, Κέων, Tas ἄλλας νήσους, οὐ ναῦς οὐ τειχὴ 
rN / ΄ ΄ 3 f > ε , Ν 
τῆς πόλεως τότε κτησαμένης, ἐξήλθετε εἰς Αλίαρτον Kat 

/ 5 La ε / ᾽ν 3 a ap) / 
πάλιν ov πολλαῖς ἡμέραις VOTEPOV ELS Κόρινθον, τῶν τότε 


3. καὶ (before τὰ) om. Az. 5. Kéwv, ras ἄλλας Dobree; Κλεωνὰς, ἄλλας 2; 
οὐ ναῦς οὐ τείχη vulg.; οὐ.. οὔτε Σ, L. 6. κτη- 


σαμένης Σ',1,, A2; κεκτημένης = (over KTnoapeévns), vulg. 


Κλεωνὰς, τὰς ἄλλας L, vulg. 


τ ----΄-- 


the subject state (Sexadapxia), who were 
partizans of Sparta. See Plutarch, Ly-- 
sand. 13: καταλύων δὲ τοὺς δήμους Kal τὰς 
ἄλλας πολιτείας, ἕνα μὲν ἁρμοστὴν ἑκάστῃ 
Λακεδαιμόνιον κατέλιπε, δέκα δ᾽ ἄρχοντας 
ἐκ τῶν ὑπ᾽ αὐτοῦ συγκεκροτημένων κατὰ 
πόλιν ἑταιρειῶν " καὶ ταῦτα πράττων ὁμοίως 
ἔν τε ταῖς πολεμίαις καὶ ταῖς συμμάχοις 
γεγενημέναις πόλεσι, παρέπλει σχολαίως. 
See Grote IX. 258- 

3, τὰ κύκλῳ τῆς ᾿Αττικῆθ: more 
rhetorical than τὰ περὶ τὴν ᾿Αττικήν, 
κύκλῳ having the adverbial sense of 
around. See iv. 4°, εἴχομεν πάντα τὸν 
τόπον οἰκεῖον κύκλῳ, and XIX. 155, ἐπο- 
ρεύοντο κύκλῳ, they travelled round. 

4. HEvPouy...Alywav: Euboea and 
Megara had been ἴῃ the hands of the 
Spartans before the end of the Pelopon- 
nesian war. Tanagra was held by friends 
of Sparta in 377 B.c. (Xen. Hell. v. 4, 49), 
and we see here that it was Spartan in 395. 
Aegina, which Athens had settled with 
her own people in 431, after expelling 
the native population, was restored to its 
former owners (so far as this was possible) 
by Lysander in 405, as he was on his 
way to attack Athens (Thuc. 11.27; Xen. 
Hell. 11. 2, 9). Boeotia as a whole was 
nominally allied with Sparta; but Thebes 
and other towns became disgusted with 
Sparta’s tyrannical conduct soon after the 
end of the war, and though Thebes had 
been the greatest enemy of Athens when 
the peace was made, she harboured Thra- 
sybulus and his fellow exiles before they 
attacked the Thirty in 403. This dis- 
affection ended in the Boeotian war in 
395, in which Athens aided Thebes (see 
below); in the battle of Haliartus the 


allies gained a doubtful victory over 
Sparta, which was made decisive by the 
death of Lysander on the field. (See 
Grote 1x. 409.) The invasion of Boeotia 
by Lysander and his Spartan army justi- 
fies τὴν Βοιωτίαν ἅπασαν from the Athe- 
nian point of view. It must not be 
thought that old Spartan allies {κθ΄ 
Megara were subjected ‘to Lysander’s 
harmosts and garrisons, notwithstanding 
Plutarch’s remark quoted above. 

5. Κέων, τὰς ἄλλας νήσους, i.e. Ceos 
and the adjacent islands,Tenos, Andros, — 
Cythnus, Melos, etc. Melos ismentioned ~ 
as restored to its old inhabitants by Ly- 
sander (Plut. Lys. 14). The emendation — 
Kéwy, τὰς ἄλλας νήσους for Κλεώνας, 
ἄλλας νήσους (Σ) removes the difficulty 
caused by the mention (for no apparent 
reason) of Cleonae, a town between 
Corinth and Argos, under τὰ κύκλῳ τῆς 
᾿Αττικῆς. If Cleonae were named, it 
would naturally precede Aegina and 
follow Megara. Cf. Αἴγιναν καὶ Κέω καὶ 
Ἄνδρον, Xen. Hell. v. 4, 61.—ovd vats od 
τείχη τότε κτησαμένης : Athens was re- 
quired by Sparta to demolish her Long 
Walls and the walls of the Piraeus, not those 
of the ἄστυ ; and she was allowed to keep 
twelve war-ships: see Xen. Hell. Il. 2, 20. 
Here τότε κτησαμένης (not κεκτημένη!) 
means that she had not yet acquired any — 
ships or walls beyond what were left her " 
at the end of the war. West. thinks παῖς 
ἀνακτησαμένης (the strictly correct word) 
was avoided as suggestive of previous loss. 

6. eis‘ AXlaprov: see note on l. 4. 

7. οὐ πολλαῖς ἡμέραις: according to 
the accepted chronology, the battle of 
Haliartus was in the autumn of 395 B.C., 


NEP! TOY 2TEPANOY 69 


5 *¢ > x ant 
Αθηναίων πόλλ᾽ ἂν ἐχόντων μνησικακῆσαι καὶ Κορινθίοις 


\ A 
Kat Θηβαίοις τῶν περὶ TOV Δεκελεικὸν πόλεμον πραχθέντων. 


3 > 3 > / ~ 50.» 5 id 
ἀλλ ουκ εποιουν Τοῦτο, οὐὸ eyyus. 


> / > id Y¥f)> ©¢ \ 3 la > ld ee Pe ed 
ἀμφότερα, Αἰσχίνη, οὐθ UTEp EVEPYVET WV ET7TOLOVVY OUT ακιν- 


ὃ TS ae 3 > > ὃ Ν la m Ν ἊΨ 
VV εἐώρων. ἀλλ᾽ οὐ διὰ ταῦτα προΐεντο τοὺς καταφεύγοντας 


ἐφ᾽ ἑαυτοὺς, ἀλλ᾽ ὑπὲρ εὐδοξίας καὶ τιμῆς ἤθελον τοῖς δεινοῖς - 


αὑτοὺς διδόναι, ὀρθῶς καὶ καλῶς βουλευόμενοι. πέρας μὲν 5 


is 4 > # 3 Ν “A / / “ἡ 3 3 / 
yap ἅπασιν ἀνθρώποις ἐστὶ τοῦ βίου θάνατος, κἂν ἐν οἰκίσ κῳ 
F ἴων ἴω 
τις αὑτὸν καθείρξας τηρῇ δεῖ δὲ τοὺς ἀγαθοὺς avdpas 
lan Y a) nw 
ἐγχειρεῖν μὲν ἁπασιν ἀεὶ τοῖς καλοῖς, THY ἀγαθὴν προβαλλο- 


μένους ἐλπίδα, φέρειν δ᾽ av ὁ θεὸς διδῷ γενναίως. 


8. ἐχ. ἐγκαλεῖν καὶ Θηβ. καὶ Kop. V6. 


9. Δεκελεικὸν L, Ar, B, Etym. Magn. 


Ῥ. 30, 1 (see Vomel); Δεκελικὸν Σὶ (but Δεκελεικοῦ in XXII. 15). 


§@77 1. réreom. Ar. 3. mpotevro x, 1, ΑΔ; mpoetvro L?, Ar, B, O; 
πρόειντο vulg. . ἐφ᾽ αὑτοὺς B, O; ἐπ᾽ αὐτοὺς Ar. 6. θάνατος Σ, L, 
At. 2, B, Y, O; 6 θάνατος vulg. 9. φέρειν δ᾽ αν ὃ ὁ θεὸς διδῷ D; φέρειν δ᾽ 6 τι 


ἂν θεὸς διδῷ = (yp), vulg.; ὃ av Stob.; ἃ ἂν διδῷ Schol. Il. v. 233; av Vom., later edd. 


and that of Corinth in thesummer of 394, 
in the year of Eubulides (see the inscrip- 
tion below). The Corinthian war was 
the result of a combination of Athenians, 
_ ‘Corinthians, Boeotians, Euboeans, Ar- 
gives, and others against Sparta. In the 
battle of Corinth, called ἡ μεγάλη μάχη 
in XX. 52, the Spartans were victorious. 
See Grote Ix. 426—429. The beautiful 
monument, representing a young warrior 
on horseback, now standing near the 
Dipylon gate of Athens, was erected in 
honour of Dexileos, one of the Athenian 
horsemen slain in this battle. The inscrip- 
tion is: Δεξίλεως Λυσανίου Θορίκιος. | ἐγέ- 
vero ἐπὶ Tevodvdpou ἄρχοντος, ἀπέθανε ἐπ᾽ 
Εὐβουλίδου | ἐγ Κορίνθῳ τῶν πέντε ἱππέων. 
See C. I. Att. 11. 3, Nos. 2084 and 1673; 
also in Hicks, Gr. Inscr., Nos. 69 and 
58. Nos. 65, 66 and 67 in Hicks refer 
to the relations of Athens to the Boeo- 
tian and Corinthian wars. 

8. πολλ᾽ ἂν ἐχόντων (πόλλ᾽ ἂν εἶχον), 
Le. they might have done so, potuissent. 
Das) 2.4. 

9. Δεκελεικὸν πόλεμον, a name often 
given to the last years of the Pelopon- 

nesian war (413—404 B.C.) when the 


Spartans held the fortress of Decelea in 
Attica. 

Io. οὐδ᾽ ἐγγύς: cf. ὃ 127. 

§ 97. 5. πέρας μὲν...τηρῇ : this 
was celebrated as a gnomic saying in 
various forms: see Dindorf’s note. In 
Lucian, Dem. Encom. 5, it is compared 
with I]. XII. 322—328; and the following 
words, 6de?...éAmida, with XII. 243, εἷς 
οἰωνὸς ἄριστος. Dissen quotes Propert. 
Iv. (111.) 18, 25. The meaning is not 
the flat truism, ‘‘death is the end of all 
men’s lives,” but αὐ men’s lives have 
a fixed limit in death, and this is made 
a ground for devoting our lives to noble 
ends, for which it is worthy to die. 

6. ἐν οἰκίσκῳ, iz a chamber: ἀντὶ 
τοῦ μικρῷ τινι οἰκήματι, Harpocration, 
who refers to an erroneous attempt of 
Didymus to explain οἰκίσκῳ here by a 
comic use of the word for ὀρνιθοτροφεῖον, 
bird-cage, or dovecote. The same error 
appears in the Scholia to Demosthenes. 

8. προβαλλομένους ἐλπίδα, protecting 
themselves by hope (holding tt before them, 
like a shield). Dissen quotes Menander, 
frag. 572 (Kock); ὅταν τι πράττῃς ὅσιον, 
ἀγαθὴν ἐλπίδα ] πρόβαλλε σαυτῷ, τοῦτο 


/ 7 ἴω 
KQLTOL TOTE TAVTA 97 


ταῦτ᾽ 98 


5 


99 


70 AHMOZOENOY2 ~ 


lal . “A ε 7, 
ἐποίουν οἱ ὑμέτεροι πρόγονοι, ταῦθ᾽ ὑμεῖς οἱ πρεσβύτεροι, 
ἃ if > ἊΝ 
ot, Λακεδαιμονίους οὐ φίλους ὄντας οὐδ᾽ εὐεργέτας, ἀλλὰ 


πολλὰ τὴν πόλιν ἡμῶν ἠδικηκότας καὶ μεγάλα, ἐπειδὴ 


ἴω lal 7 
Θηβαῖοι κρατήσαντες ἐν Λεύκτροις ἀνελεῖν ἐπεχείρουν, διε- 


4 ee \@ 
κωλύσατε, ov φοβηθέντες τὴν τότε Θηβαίοις ῥώμην καὶ 2 


δόξαν ὑπάρχουσαν, οὐδ᾽ ὑπὲρ οἷα πεποιηκότων ἀνθρώπων 
κινδυνεύσετε διαλογισάμενοι" καὶ γάρ τοι πᾶσι τοῖς “Ελλησιν 
ἐδείξατε ἐκ τούτων ὅτι, κἂν ὁτιοῦν τις εἰς ὑμᾶς ἐξαμάρτῃ, 
τούτων τὴν ὀργὴν εἰς τἀλλ᾽ ἔχετε, ἐὰν δ᾽ ὑπὲρ σωτηρίας ἢ 
ἐλευθερίας κίνδυνός τις αὐτοὺς καταλαμβάνῃ, οὔτε μνησικα- 


κήσετε οὔθ᾽ ὑπολογιεῖσθε. 


8 98. 2. ὑμέτεροι Σ, L, vulg.; ἡμέτεροι Ar; vper. (7 over v) V6. 


ταῦθ᾽) Az. ὑμεῖς D3 ὑμῶν Σ (yp), L, Az; ὑμῖν Ar; ἡμῖν V6. 
8 99. 2. ὅτι 0m. V6. τις om. Al. 3. τούτων D; τούτῳ = (yp), 1.» 
vulg. ἐὰν 2, L; ἂν vulg. 4. ἐλευθερίας ἢ σωτηρίας Al. 5. μόνον 2, 


vulg.; μόνων L, Ar. 2, Dind., BI. 


γιγνώσκων ὅτι | τόλμῃ δικαίᾳ Kal θεὸς συλ- 
λαμβάνει. Cf. τῷ προβάλλεσθαι, § 195+. 

8 98. 2. πρόγονοι: see note on § 95’. 
—tpets: cf. rap’ ὑμῶν τῶν πρεσβυτέρων, 
<i ΕΣ: 

3. «Λακεδαιμονίους, obj. of ἀνελεῖν, 
διεκωλύσατε having τοὺς Θηβαίους, or per- 
haps simply τὸ πρᾶγμα, understood as its 
object. From the position of Λακ. we 
should expect it to belong to the leading 
verb. 

5. κρατήσαντες ἐν Λεύκτροις: the 
‘*Leuctricinsolence”’ of Thebes (Diod.xv1. 
58), which made her rather than Sparta 
the natural enemy of Athens from 371 to 
339 B.C., was notorious. See §§ 18° and 
36%. In 370, a year after Leuctra, Epa- 
minondas with a Theban army invaded 
Laconia and marched up to the city 
of Sparta itself; but he did not venture 
to enter the unwalled city and withdrew 
into Arcadia. At this time he established 
the new cities of Messene and Megalo- 
polis, to hold Sparta in check. In this 
trying emergency, Sparta humiliated her- 
self so far as to ask help from her old 
enemy, Athens. Her request was granted, 
and Iphicrates was sent into Peloponne- 
sus to the aid of Sparta with 12,000 
Athenians in the spring of 369 B.c. This 


Vokes ee. ΄, , ψ 
και ουκ εἐπι τουτῶν μονον OUTWS 


τόθ᾽ (for 


saved Sparta from another invasion at 
this time. See Xen. Hell. v1. 5, 33—52, 
and Grote x. 320—326. The alliance 
then formed remained unbroken, though - 
sometimes strained, until after the battle 
of Mantinea in 362 B.C., in which Athens 
fought on the side of Sparta. Nations 
seldom go to war from the pure sense of 
justice which Demosthenes here attributes 
to Athens; of course fear of the growing 
power of Thebes under Epaminondas, 
as well as political sagacity, had great 
influence on her policy towards Sparta. 

8 99. 3. τούτων, for this, referring 
to ὁτιοῦν, as ὅστις can always have a 
plural antecedent. 

4. μνησικακήσετε.. ὑπολογιεῖσθε: μνη-᾿ 
σικακεῖν, though usualy intransitive (cf. 
§ τοι). may have an accusative, as uv7- 
σικακῆσαι τὴν ἡλικίαν, Ar. Nub. 999. 
Thus both verbs may here have the same 
object, suggested by ὁτιοῦν. 

5. ἐπὶ τούτων μόνον: cf. XV. 15, τῷ 
Ῥοδίων δήμῳ μόνον, and ΙΧ. 57, παρὰ 
τούτοις μόνον. In these cases μόνον modi- 
fies the whole sentence as an adverb, 
where we should expect the adjective 
μόνων or μόνῳ with the noun. We are 
often careless about the position of only; 
as “he only went to London once.” 


. νας 


ΠΕΡΙ TOY ZTE®ANOY 71 


ἐσχήκατε, ἀλλὰ πάλιν σφετεριζομένων Θηβαίων τὴν EvBovav 
> / 3Q> e e Ἂς ts Ν᾿ νΨ 
οὐ περιείδετε, οὐδ᾽ ὧν ὑπὸ Θεμίσωνος καὶ Θεοδώρου περὶ 
᾿Ωρωπὸν ἠδίκησθε ἀνεμνήσθητε, ἀλλ᾽ ἐβοηθήσατε καὶ 
τούτοις, τῶν ἐθελοντῶν τότε τριηράρχων πρῶτον γενομένων 
A , 4 ὯΝ Ὧν 34. (« 3 3 “γι... 5 Ν , 
™ πόλει, ὧν εἷς ἣν ἐγώ. ἀλλ᾽ οὕπω περὶ τούτων. 
ἧς Ἂν εἰ /, Ν Ν ἴω % ἴω lal > » 
καλὸν μὲν ἐποιήσατε καὶ TO σῶσαι τὴν νῆσον, πολλῷ δ᾽ ἔτι 
τούτου κάλλιον τὸ καταστάντες κύριοι καὶ τῶν σωμάτων καὶ 
τῶν πόλεων ἀποδοῦναι ταῦτα δικαΐως αὐτοῖς τοῖς ἐξημαρτη- 
κόσιν εἰς ὑμᾶς, μηδὲν ὧν ἠδίκησθε ἐν οἷς ἐπιστεύθητε 5 
ὑπολογισάμενοι. μυρία τοίνυν ἕτερ᾽ εἰπεῖν ἔχων παραλείπω, 


ἐθελοντῶν Β; ἐθελόντων Σ, L, vulg. (see § 6839). τότε τριηράρχων L; 


καὶ 100 


4, 1). 


τριηράρχων τότε B; τότε τριηραρχῶν Σ, A2; τριηραρχῶν τότε vig.’ 


8 100. τ. 


kat ΣΦ: καίτοι L, vulg. 5. 
Gyre Σ (yp), L*, Dind. and later edd.; om. 2, L}, Az. 6. 


ἐν ois (ἐφ᾽ οἷς V6) ἐπιστεύ- 
ἕτερα om. ΑΙ. 


6. σφετεριζομένων τὴν Εὔβοιαν : cf. 
“τῇ, Euboea had been under the control 
of Thebes since the battle of Leuctra, but 
in 357 B.c. a Theban army was sent to 
quiet some disturbances in the island. The 
Eretrians called on Athens for help against 
her local-enemies, who were supported 
by the Thebans; and the Athenians with 
great energy sent an army to Euboea, 
which drove the whole Theban force from 
the island in thirty days. This is the 
famous expedition to which the orators 
always referred with pride. See Dem. 
πο τὺ 17; Aesch, 111.85, 11, 
164; Diod. xvi. 7; Grote xI. Ch. 86, 
pp. 306—309. 

7. οὐ περιείδετε: cf. διεκωλύσατε, 
8 98°.—Oeplowvos: a tyrant of Eretria, 
who in 366 B.c. took from Athens the 
frontier town of Oropus and gave it to 
Thebes. Theodorus, another Euboean, 
was concerned in this seizure. (Grote, 
x. Ch. 79, p- 302.) Oropus had long 
been a bone of contention between Athens 
and Thebes. It was stipulated that 
Thebes should now hold the town only 
until the right to it could be settled by 
arbitration (μέχρι δίκης, Xen. Hell. vii. 
The ‘‘case of Oropus” was a 
protracted one; and it is said that Demo- 
sthenes as a boy was first inspired with 
a passion for oratory by hearing an elo- 


quent plea of Callistratus in defence of 
the rights of Athens (Plut. Dem. 5). 

9. τούτοις: the Euboeans.—tov ἐθε- 
λοντῶν...τῇ πόλει, i.e. the state then for 
the first time obtained the services of 
volunteer trierarchs (τῶν, because these 
became an institution: see Boeckh, 
Staatsh. d. Ath. 1. 638, 657, 686. Most 
MSS. have ἐθελόντων for the noun ἐθελον- 
τῶν (see § 68°). See xxI. 161: ἐγένοντο 
εἰς HvBouav ἐπιδόσεις παρ᾽ ὑμῖν πρῶται" 
τούτων οὐκ ἣν Μειδίας, ἀλλ᾽ ἐγὼ, καὶ 
συντριήραρχος ἣν μοι Φαλῖνος. See XXII. 
14. Demosthenes therefore was joint 
trierarch with Phalinus for the expedition 
to Euboea. 

Io. ἀλλ᾽ οὔπω περὶ τούτων : this may 
look forward to the orator’s account of 
his public services in § 267, or possibly 
to the discussion of his trierarchic reform 
in §§ 102—109. οὔπω: sc. λέξω, but in 
XIX. 200, μήπω Tatra: sc. εἴπωμεν. 

§ 100. 2. Kal τὸ σῶσαι τὴν νῆσον, 
even saving the island, i.e. this by itself, 
opposed to πολλῷ δ΄.. κάλλιον, SC. ἐποιή- 
σατε. , 

5. μηξδὲν...... ὑπολογισάμενοι : μηδέν 
shows that the participial clause is closely 
connected with τὸ ἀποδοῦναι, not with 
ἐποιήσατε (understood). The meaning is 
without taking into account, rather than 
not taking into account. ‘This use of μή 


- 


τοῖν πὶ ee 


τοι ee ee 
> a. eee 


——- 
o aa. Ὲ 


ss 
a) 


72 AHMOZOENOY2 


ναυμαχίας, ἐξόδους πεζὰς, στρατείας καὶ πάλαι γεγονυίας 

καὶ νῦν ἐφ᾽ ἡμῶν αὐτῶν, ἃς ἁπάσας ἡ πόλις τῆς τῶν ἄλλων 
101 Ἑλλήνων ἐλευθερίας καὶ σωτηρίας πεποίηται. εἶτ᾽ ἐγὼ 
ε \ la 

τεθεωρηκὼς ἐν τοσούτοις καὶ τοιούτοις THY πόλιν ὕπερ τῶν 
“ I 3 ε Ν 
τοῖς ἄλλοις συμφερόντων ἐθέλουσαν ἀγωνίζεσθαι, ὑπὲρ 

39. ees “4 \ ΜᾺ ia sf foe ΧΝ λ ’ὔ 

αὐτῆς τρόπον τινὰ τῆς βουλῆς οὔσης τί ἐμελλον κελεύσειν 
a ω ᾿ a \ / Ν 

ἢ τί συμβουλεύσειν αὐτῇ ποιεῖν ; μνησικακεῖν νὴ Δία πρὸς 


σι 


la 7 ag 
τοὺς βουλομένους σῴζεσθαι, καὶ προφάσεις ζητεῖν dv as 
ἅπαντα προησόμεθα.. 


ἧς IF 08 “ἡ > , s ὃ ᾽ὕὔ a 

καὶ TLS οὐκ ἂν ἀπέκτεινέ με δικαίως, 26 
3, fn la wn ’ὔὕ 

εἴ τι τῶν ὑπαρχόντων Τῇ πόλει καλῶν λόγῳ μόνον καταισχύ- 

3 " » Δ 9 , 3 

νειν ἐπεχείρησ᾽ av; ἐπεὶ τό γε ἔργον οὐκ ἂν ἐποιήσαθ 


πααναυυσυτ SS ΑΙ ΗΝ, ἘΝ 


Td συμφέροντα Ἔν 


7, 8. ναυμαχίας... ἡμῶν αὐτών Σ,1, 


Ἑλλήνων 1,2, Β, vulg.; ᾿Ελλήνων dver’ Ar; Ἑλλήνων om. V6; ἕνεκα om. 2, 


path fe 8. ἡμῶν 2, L, Ar, B, F, ®; 
X1X. 76). 

8 101. 2. τεθαρρηκὼς L. te 
βουλεύειν Ar, μνησικακεῖν LL, 
H. Wolf. 6. ds by corr. 2. ie 


9. ἐπεχείρησ᾽ ἄν Σ 


τότε (for τό γε) At. ἐποιήσασθ᾽ At. 


συμβουλῆς F. 


προηγησόμεθα Ol. 
Ἐ Ls ἐπεχείρησα ἂν Az, ΕἸ, BY, Φ; ἂν om. Ar, Β5, eS Plut. 


: ἐξόδους, πεζὰς στρατείας, καὶ vulg.; στρατιας 
ὑμῶν vulg. 


ἄλλων om. AI. 9. ἕνεχ᾽ 
Lien 


ἤμελλον Al. 5. συμ- 


B2, V6; μνησικακήσειν Σ, Β', vulg.; μνησικακῆσαι 


προησόμεθα ΣΙ L, Ar. 2, B, F, ®; apone. 
8. μόνων V6. αἰσχύνειν At. 


shows the distinction between τὸ... ἀπο- 
δοῦναι and ὅτι.. ἀπέδοτε, the giving up 
and (the fact) that you gave up, though 
we often have to translate both by the 
same or equivalent expressions: cf. the 
distinction between ὥστε οὐκ ἀπεδότε and 
ὥστε μὴ ἀποδοῦναι ὑμᾶς, which is often 
very hard to express (see M.T. 582, 583), 
and has often been overlooked.—év ots 
ἐπιστεύθητε (for ἐν ἐκείνοις a), represent- 
ing the active πιστεύειν ταῦτα ὑμῖν, as ὧν 
ἠδίκησθε represents ἀδικεῖν ταῦτα ὑμᾶς: 


cf. §§ 18° and 19°. 


7. ἐξόδους πεζὰς, land expeditions 
(after ναυμαχία) ; στρατείας, σα) βαϊφγς. 

8. τῆς... σωτηρίας, rare genitive of 
purpose or motive, generally found with 
ἕνεκα, which is added here in most MSs. 
So XIX. 76, πᾶσ᾽ ἀπάτη καὶ τέχνη συνε- 
σκευάσθη τοῦ περὶ Φωκέας ὀλέθρου, with 
similar variety of reading. (See G. 1127.) 
The infinitive with τοῦ is common in this 
construction, especially in Thucydides 
(M.T. 798): an example occurs in § 107%, 
TOU μὴ ποιεῖν. 


8 101. 3. ὑπὲρ αὐτῆς... οὔσης, when 
the question in a manner concerned her- 


ei 


5. νὴ Ala, in bitter irony: cf. XX. 
Ese 


6. 8” as προησόμεθα (excuses) for Ι 


sacrificing (final). 

8. ὑπαρχόντων (cf. ὃ 954): the glories 
(καλά) are viewed as a public possession. 

9. ἐπεχείρησ᾽ dv: I follow this reading 
of the best Mss. with little hesitation, 
chiefly because I cannot see how such a 
change could creep into the best Mss. 
by corruption, if the genuine reading 
were simply εἰ ἐπεχείρησα, tf 7 had under- 
taken, which would be perfectly clear. 
There is no objection to ef ἐπεχείρησ᾽ ἄν, 
as to either grammar or sense. It is 
amply justified by XIX. 172, where there 
are no various readings and nobody 
doubts the text: ef μὴ διὰ τὸ τούτους 
βούλεσθαι σῶσαι, ἐξώλης ἀπολοίμην καὶ 
προώλης εἰ προσλαβών γ᾽ ἂν ἀργύριον 


πάνυ πολὺ μετὰ τούτων ἐπρέσβευσα. 


There εἰ ἐπρέσβευσα ἄν is tf J would have 


ΠΕΡῚ TOY ZTEbANOY 73 


ὑμεῖς, ἀκριβῶς old ἐγώ: εἰ γὰρ ἐβούλεσθε, τί ἣν ἐμποδών; 
οὐκ ἐξῆν; οὐχ ὑπῆρχον Ol ταῦτ᾽ ἐροῦντες οὗτοι; 

Βούλομαι τοίνυν ἐπανελθεῖν ἐφ᾽ ἃ τούτων ἑξῆς ἐπολιτευό- 
μὴν: καὶ σκοπεῖτε ἐν τούτοις πάλιν αὖ τί τὸ τῇ πόλει 
βέλτιστον ἦν. ὁρῶν γὰρ, ὦ ἄνδρες ᾿Αθηναῖοι, τὸ ναυτικὸν 
ὑμῶν καταλυόμενον, καὶ τοὺς μὲν πλουσίους ἀτελεῖς ἀπὸ 
μικρῶν ἀναλωμάτων γιγνομένους τοὺς δὲ μέτρι᾽ ἢ μικρὰ 
κεκτημένους τῶν πολιτῶν τὰ ὄντ᾽ ἀπολλύοντας, ἔτι δ᾽ ὕστε- 


5 


Io. ἀκριβῶς om. At. 11. οὐκ ὑπῆρχον >. 
§102. 1. ἐλθεῖν Θ. “2. 7d0m. Ο. 3. συμφέρον ἦν V6. 5. γενο- 
μένους B®; γινομένους V6. καὶ (for ἢ) At. 6. τῶν πολιτῶν om. AI. τὰ 


ὄντ᾽ om. D1; τὰ om. ΟἹ. 
3 UA 
ἀπολλύντας vulg. . 


ἀπολλύοντας Σ, 1.1, Az, 


®; (w. vd, 1,32); ἀπολλύ ντας F ; 


gone on the embassy, as εἰ ἐπεχείρησα" ἄν 
here is if 7 would have undertaken (for 
any consideration). See M.T. 506. Is 
there not a justification of ἐπεχείρησ᾽ ἄν 
in the following τό γ᾽ ἔργον οὐκ ἂν 
ἐποιήσαθ᾽ ὑμεῖς, you would not have done 
the thing in reality (épyw), opposed to 
the preceding supposition, 2f 7 had been 
capable of undertaking it even in word 
(λόγῳ) ? 

II. οὐχ ὑπήρχον.. οὗτοι; were not 
these men here ready to tell you this? 
ταῦτα refers to prno.kaxely...mponobueda 
(5—7). 

§§ 102—109. The orator defends his 
Trierarchic Law (340 B.C.) against the 
attacks of Aeschines. 

§ 102. 1. ἐπανελθεῖν : after the di- 
gression in §§ 95—101, he now returns to 
his own political acts. Next in order to 
his rescue of Byzantium and the Helles- 
pont (τούτων ἑξῆς) he speaks of his reform 
of the trierarchy at Athens. This im- 


portant measure was carried in 340 B.C., 


at about the time of the outbreak of the 
war with Philip (see § 107°). See note 
on ὃ 103°. For an account of the law of 
Demosthenes and of the various systems of 
trierarchy which preceded it, see Boeckh’s 
Staatsh. d. Ath. 1. Bk 4, Ch. 11—16. 

4. καταλυόμενον, breaking wp: notice 
the following descriptive present parti- 
ciples.—daredets... γιγνομένους, becoming 
exempt (from all ‘ liturgies’) dy small pay- 


ments, As allthe members of a συντέλεια 
(under the former system) were assessed 
equally for the support of their ship, the 


_ richer συντελεῖς might satisfy the law (as in 


the case supposed in ὃ 104) by paying τς 
of the expense of one ship; and as no one 
could be required to take more than one 
‘liturgy’ in the same year, they would thus 
be exempt from all other services. But the 
richest of all, the leaders of the symmo- 
ries (§ 103°), sometimes ingeniously used 
their legal duty of advancing the money 
for the trierarchy in case of special neces- 
sity as a means of avoiding even their 
own legal share of the expense. They 
could bargain with a contractor to do all 
the work for a fixed’ sum (e.g. a talent), 
which they advanced, afterwards assess- 
ing this whole sum, or an unfair part 
of it, on their poorer colleagues. See 
Dem. XXI. 155: ὅτε πρῶτον μὲν διακοσίους 
καὶ χιλίους πεποιήκατε συντελεῖς ὑμεῖς, 
παρ᾽ ὧν εἰσπραττόμενοι τάλαντον τα- 
λάντου μισθοῦσι τὰς τριηραρχίας οὗτοι 
(i.e. rich men like Midias),...déo7’ αὐτῶν 
ἐνίοις TH ἀληθείᾳ τὸ μηδὲν ἀναλῶσαι καὶ 
δοκεῖν λελῃτουργηκέναι καὶ τῶν ἄλλων 
λῃτουργιῶν ἀτελέσι γεγενῆσθαι περί- 
εστιν. 

6. τὰ ὄντ᾽ ἀπολλύοντας: a strong 
expression of the injustice to which the 
poorer συντελεῖς were liable.—torept- 
ἵουσαν.. τῶν καιρῶν, as we say, behind 
time. 


IO 


102 


i ταν ᾿ἀσσὰ .΄᾿. 


74 AHMOSOENOY= 


/ 5 , ἈΝ ‘a ἴω “ἢ 2) / θ᾽ 
ρίζουσαν ἐκ τούτων τὴν πόλιν τῶν καιρῶν, EUNKA νόμον κα 
lal \ / 
ὃν τοὺς μὲν τὰ δίκαια ποιεῖν ἠνάγκασα, [τοὺς πλουσίους, | 
x δὲ fe 4 3 LO ν΄ a aX δ᾽ ν ἘΝ 
τοὺς δὲ πένητας ἔπαυσ᾽ ἀδικουμένους, Τῇ πόλει O ὅπερ Ὧν 


a Ν > / 
10 χρησιμώτατον, EV καυρῷ γίγνεσθαι τὰς παρασκευὰς ETOLNT A. 
ἴω ἴω wn las Maes 4 
103 καὶ γραφεὶς τὸν ἀγῶνα τουτον εἰς ὑμᾶς εἰσῆλθον καὶ ἀπέφυ- 
XN x Id ἴων ’ὔ ε 7 5 » / 
γον, καὶ TO μέρος τῶν ψήφων ὃ διώκων οὐκ ἔλαβεν. καίτοι 
ἴω ἴω “ἡ ἈΝ /, 
πόσα χρήματα τοὺς ἡγεμόνας τῶν συμμοριῶν ἢ TOUS δευτέρους 
9 κ᾿ A 
καὶ τρίτους οἴεσθέ μοι διδόναι ὥστε μάλιστα μὲν μὴ θεῖναι 
5 Ν eae. A > δὲ \ HO 2) 38 > ε ία . Σ 
τὸν νόμὸν τοῦτον, εἰ δὲ μὴ, καταβάλλοντ᾽ ἐαν ἐν ὑπωμοσιᾷ; — 


7. ἐκ τούτων ὑστερίζ. Υ. “ὃ. 
8. τοὺς πλουσίους om. West., in [ ] Lips. 
 (mg.), Reiske. 


καθ᾽ dv τοὺς μὲν L, vulg.; τοὺς om. 2, ®. ἣ 


το. ναυτικὰς (for Tas) Z (yp), B (mg.), 


8 103. 1. γραφεὶς εἰς Ar; κατηγορηθεὶς 1,2; γραφεὶς παρανόμων Σ (mg.), mg. οὗ 
B, F, and Φ; τοῦτον παρανόμων vulg.; παρανόμων om. Σ, L, 2, Ε΄. 2. τὸ μέρος. — 
>, 11, F, Φ; τὸ πέμπτον μέρος At, B, vulg. (cf. 88. 222, 250, 266). 3. τοὺς (bef. 
frye.) om. Ol. 4. θεῖναί we vulg.; we om. 2, ΤΑ ΟΕ: 5. καταβάλλοντα 


>, Li, Φ, VY; καταβαλόντα vulg. 


με after καταβ. vulg.; om. 2, ΤΑ va By Gs 


8. [τοὺς πλουσίους]: I bracket these 
words (which West. omits), as an ex- 
planation of τοὺς μὲν, which needs no 
such note, not venturing to read καθ᾽ ὃν 
μὲν (without τούς) with 2. The reading 
is very doubtful, though the sense is clear. 

8 108. 1. γραφεὶς : sc. παρανόμων. 
- τὸν ἀγῶνα τοῦτον... εἰσῆλθον, i.e. J stood 
(entered on) my trial on this issue before 
you, eis ὑμᾶς implying coming into court. 
τοῦτον refers to γραφεὶς, meaning the trial 
which followed his being indicted. Cf. 
εἰσῆλθον τὴν γραφήν, ὃ 105”. 

2. τὸ μέρος (sc. πέμπτον) : cf. ὃ 266%. 
See note on § 828. 

3. ἡγεμόνας τῶν συμμοριῶν, Jeaders 
of the symmories, here probably the 
symmories of the trierarchy, though the 
term commonly refers to the 300 richest 
citizens (of τριακόσιοι, ὃ 171°), who were 
leaders of the symmories of the property- 
tax (εἰσφορά). Under the system which 
prevailed from 357 to 340 B.C., the 1200 
richest citizens, who alone were liable to 
the duty of the trierarchy, were divided 
into 20 symmories, regularly of 60 men 
each. To each of these symmories was 
assigned a number of triremes to be fitted 
out in each year, regulated by the needs 
of the state. The symmory divided itself 


into smaller bodies (συντέλειαι), each of 
which equipped a single ship. The 
expense was borne equally by all the 
members, without regard to their wealth. 
Each symmory probably had a single 
leader, and the 20 leaders, with the two 
classes called δεύτεροι and τρίτοι (who are 
not mentioned elsewhere), evidently be- 
longed to the τριακόσιοι, perhaps including ~ 
all of that class in the symmories (15 in| 
each). The new law of Demosthenes 
imposed the burden of the trierarchy on 
the members of each symmory according 
to their property, thus greatly increasing 
the assessment of the richer and diminish- 
ing that of the poorer members. Of this 
a striking case is given in ὃ 104°. This 
is all the certain knowledge that we have 
of this important law. The details often 
quoted from § 106 are untrustworthy. 

4. ϑιδόναι, offered, representing ἐδί- 
δοσαν, which appears in § το45.--μάλιστα 
μὲν, above all things, opposed to εἰ δὲ 
μὴ (5), otherwise, if not (M.T. 478).---κἡ 
θεῖναι, vot Zo enact, i.e. not to bring the” 
new law before the νομοθέται. 

5. καταβάλλοντ᾽ ἐᾶν ἐν ὑπωμοσίᾳ, 20 
drop it and let it lie under notice of indict-— 
ment (lit. under the prosecutor's oath to” 
bring an indictment). Whenever anyone — 


, c 
᾿ 


- 


: 
x 


ΠΕΡῚ TOY STEPANOY )ς 


an 3 Ἂν > “A ν 5 ͵΄ὕ > x Ν ε lal 
τοσαῦτ᾽, ὦ ἄνδρες ᾿Αθηναῖοι, ὅσα ὀκνήσαιμ᾽ ἂν πρὸς ὑμᾶς 
εἰπεῖν. καὶ ταῦτ᾽ εἰκότως ἔπραττον ἐκεῖνοι. 
ἐκ μὲν τῶν προτέρων νόμων συνεκκαίδεκα λῃτουργεῖν, αὐτοῖς 
μὲν μικρὰ καὶ οὐδὲν ἀναλίσκουσι, τοὺς δ᾽ ἀπόρους τῶν 
πολιτῶν ἐπιτρίβουσιν, ἐκ δὲ τοῦ ἐμοῦ νόμου τὸ γιγνόμενον 
κατὰ τὴν οὐσίαν ἕκαστον τιθέναι, καὶ δνοῖν ἐφάνη τριήραρχος 
ὁ τῆς μιᾶς EKTOS καὶ δέκατος πρότερον συντελής- οὐδὲ γὰρ 
τριηράρχους eT ὠνόμαζον ἑαυτοὺς, ἀλλὰ συντελεῖς. ὥστε 
δὴ ταῦτα λυθῆναι καὶ μὴ τὰ δίκαια ποιεῖν ἀναγκασθῆναι, 
3 » > 4 5 50.923Ζ3Ϊ ‘A vi la) Ἂν 
οὐκ ἔσθ᾽ ὃ τι οὐκ ἐδίδοσαν. καί μοι λέγε πρῶτον μὲν 
ἈΝ ΄, Τὴ se ᾿ὰ \ \ 5 \ 
τὸ ψήφισμα Kal ὃ εἰσῆλθον τὴν γραφὴν, εἶτα τοὺς 


6. av εἰπεῖν ἐγὼ πρὸς ὑμᾶς Ar, Φ (yp), Υ. 


§ 104. 2. πρότερον ΑἸ. 
om. 2, Ar, B, F, Φ. πρότερος. ΑἹ. 
μαΐον Β, vulg. αὐτοὺς V6. 
ἀναγκασθῆναι om. LI. 9. 

8 105. 2. τοὺς λόγους Y. 


σὺν ἑκκαίδεκα O. 6. 


ὥστε ὑπὲρ τοῦ ταῦτα Σ (yp). 8. 
οὐκ ἔστιν V6. 


δέκατος ὧν L, vulg.; ὧν 
7. ἔτι ὠνόμαζον Σ,1,, At. 2; ἐπωνό- 
Kal μι... 


- 


formally declared his intention of bringing 
a Ὑραφὴ παρανόμων against a law or 
decree, he was required to bind himself 
by an oath, called ὑπωμοσία, to prosecute 
the case. This had the effect of suspend- 
ing the law or decree if it was already 


finally passed, or of stopping a decree 


which had passed only the Senate (i.e. a 
προβούλευμα) from being voted on by the 
Assembly, until the γραφὴ παρανόμων 
could be tried. (For an account of this 
process see Essay 11.) The meaning here 
is that Demosthenes was offered large 
sums if he would either decline to bring 
his new law before the νομοθέται (uh 
θεῖναι) or else let it quietly drop (ἐᾶν) 
when a γραφὴ παρανόμων was brought 
against it after it was passed. ‘This pas- 
sage shows that dropping a law under 


_ indictment was not illegal. 


§ 104. 1. ἦν. «λῃτουργεῖν, i.e. they 
might perform the service (of the trierarchy) 
in bodies of sixteen: this is probably stated 
as an extreme case under the old law, in 
contrast with an equally extreme case of 
a man with two whole triremes to support 


under the new law. 


2. αὐτοῖς μὲν, themselves (ipsis), op- 
posed to τοὺς δ᾽ ἀπόρους (3). 


3. μικρὰ Kal οὐδὲν: see note on 
§ 1024. 

4. ἐπιτρίβουσιν, distressing (grind- 
271.).----τὸ γιγνόμενον τιθέναι, Zo pay their 
quota (what fell to each): cf. τιθέναι τὰς 
εἰσφοράς, XXII. 42. 

5. κατὰ τὴν οὐσίαν, according to his 
property: κατὰ τὸ τίμημα, according to his 
valuation, would be more strictly accu- 
rate, as the τίμημα, or taxable property, 
in different classes bore a differing pro- 
portion to the οὐσία.---δυοῖν.. .συντελής : 
it was a possible case that a man who 
had been assessed (as supposed above) 
for only one-sixteenth part of the expense 
of one ship might be compelled to pay 
for two whole ships under the new law. 
τριήραρχος suggests τριήροιν and τριήρους 
for δυοῖν and μιᾶς. 

7. συντελεῖς, as members of a συντέ- 
Aea (see note on ἃ 103%): sixteen trier- 
archs of a single ship, of whom perhaps 
no one even saw the ship, were absurd! 

9. ἐδίδοσαν, offered: cf. διδόναι as 
imperfect in § 1034. 

§ 105. 2. Ψήφισμα: this cannot be 
the trierarchic law itself, which was no 
ψήφισμα; but a decree passed after the 
ὑπωμοσία, which (as West. explains it) 


ἣν γὰρ αὐτοῖς 104 


5 


105 


χα, wee See 


76 AHMOZOENOY= 


“A /, 7 ᾿ x. % Ἂς 
καταλόγους, τόν T ἐκ τοῦ προτέρου νόμου καὶ τὸν KATH ΤῸΡ 


ἐμόν. λέγε. 
5 ΨΗΦΙΣΜΑ. 


[Ἐπὶ ἄρχοντος [Πολυκλέους, μηνὸς βοηδρομιῶνος ἕκτῃ ἐπὶ 
δέκα, φυλῆς πρυτανευούσης “Ἰπποθωντίδος, Δημοσθένης Δημο- 
σθένους ἸΠαιανιεὺς εἰσήνεγκε νόμον τριηραρχικὸν ἀντὶ τοῦ προτέρου, 
καθ᾽ ὃν αἱ συντέλειαι ἦσαν τῶν τριηράρχων" καὶ ἐπεχειροτόνησεν 

το ἡ βουλὴ καὶ ὁ δῆμος: καὶ ἀπήνεγκε παρανόμων Δημοσθένει 
[Ιατροκλῆς Φλυεὺς, καὶ τὸ μέρος τῶν ψήφων οὐ λαβὼν ἀπέτισε 
τὰς πεντακοσίας δραχμάς.] 


106 Φέρε δὴ καὶ τὸν καλὸν κατάλογον. 


ΚΑΤΑΛΟΤῸΣ. 


a / 7. 

[Τοὺς τριηράρχους καλεῖσθαι ἐπὶ τὴν τριήρη συνεκκαίδεκα ἐκ 

lal a an ΄ + es ἜΝ 
τῶν ἐν τοῖς λόχοις συντελειῶν, ἀπὸ εἴκοσι καὶ πέντε ETWV εἰς 


5 τετταράκοντα, ἐπὶ ἴσον τῇ χορηγίᾳ χρωμένους. 


, \ ς an Ν 3 n~ > ἴω ts / 
Φέρε δὴ παρὰ TOUTOV TOV EK του εμου νομου κατάλογον. 


ΚΑΤΑΛΟΤῸΣ. in 
an A! ἃ, at ᾽ / 
[Τοὺς tpinpapxovs αἱρεῖσθαι ἐπὶ τὴν τριήρη ἀπὸ τῆς οὐσίας 
\ / ΠΝ ΄ L eek δὲ ΄ ων ς ον 
κατὰ τίμησιν, ἀπὸ ταλάντων δέκα' ἐᾶν OE πλειόνων ἡ οὐσία 
/ , , 
το ἀποτετιμημένη ἢ χρημάτων, KATA τὸν ἀναλογισμὸν ἕως τριῶν πλοίων 
an > XN. j 
καὶ ὑπηρετικοῦ ἡ λειτουργία ἔστω. κατὰ τὴν αὐτὴν δὲ ἀναλογίαν 
- ͵ “Ὁ ‘32 I 
ἔστω καὶ οἷς ἐχάττων οὐσία ἐστὶ τῶν δέκα ταλάντων, εἰς συντέλειαν 
συναγομένοις εἰς τὰ δέκα τάλαντα. 


3. τὸν (after καὶ) om. Y. 
8 106. 1. καὶ οὔ. At. 2. KATA AOLPOS 2. 7. KATAAOTOY 2, ®. 


een ener στ τ τ τ ese 


ordered the suspension of the law, or documents were two lists of citizens οὔ 


(as Blass suggests) provided for the trial various degrees of wealth, with state- 


of the case.—Ka0’ 8=secundum quod, ex ments of their assessments for the trier- — 


quo, not propter quod (West.). archy under the old law and under the 


τοὺς καταλόγους : the stupidity of the law of Demosthenes. The contrast be- 


interpolator of the false documents never — tween the two called forth the question 
shows to greater advantage than in the with which § 107 begins. The docu- 
two fragments of a pretended decree ment in § 105 is not a decree, but a 
given as κατάλογοι in ὃ 106. The real memorandum. 


o> 


pee 
ΠΕΡΙ TOY STEbANOY 


wen 


“Apa μικρὰ βοηθῆσαι τοῖς πένησιν ὑμῶν δύκῶ, ἢ ἢ μίκρ᾽ 107 
ἀναλῶσαι ἂν τοῦ μὴ τὰ δίκαια ποιεῖν ἐθέλειν οἱ πλούσιοι; 


οὐ τοίνυν μόνον τῷ μὴ καθυφεῖναι ταῦτα σεμνύνομαι, οὐδὲ 
τῷ φεὶς ἀποφυγεῖν, ἀλλὰ καὶ τῷ φέροντα θεῖναι τὸ 
Ὁ γραφεὶς ἀποφυγεῖν, ἀλλὰ καὶ τῷ συμφέρο ν 


νόμον καὶ τῷ πεῖραν ἔργῳ δεδωκέναι. πάντα γὰρ τὸν 5 
πόλεμον τῶν ἀποστόλων γιγνομένων κατὰ τὸν νόμον τὸν 


D> % 3 ε / » δ 3 Ν Pp > ε 
ἐμὸν, οὐχ ἱκετηρίαν ἔθηκε τριήραρχος οὐδεὶς πώποθ᾽ ὡς 
3 td > ε A 5 5 » 9 fe > ε \ 
ἀδικούμενος Tap ὑμῖν, οὐκ ἐν Μουνιχίᾳ ἐκαθέζετο, οὐχ ὑπὸ 


8 107. 1. apd ye L, vulg.; γε om. 2}, Φ, ὑμῶν Σ, L, vulg.; ὑμῖν V6. 
καὶ (over ee 2. ἀναλώσειαν ἂν F (yp); ἀναλῶσαι ἂν ἀντὶ A2. τι rod Li. 
τοῦ L?, vulg. ἐθέλειν om. At. 2. 4- γραφῆς F, ®. ἀποφεύγεϊν (sic) 
=; ἀποφευγεῖν 1.1; ἀποφυγεῖν vulg. τὸν om. V6. 5. πειραιεῖ (for πεῖραν) 
V6. 7. ws om. Σ᾿, 8. Μουνυχίᾳ Mss.; Μουνιχίᾳ Kirchhoff, Attic in- 
scriptions. 

8 107. 1. μίκρ᾽ ἀναλῶσαι dv...é0é- Compare the perfect δεδωκέναι with the 


Rew, does tt seem likely that the rich 
would have been willing to spend (only) 
a little to escape doing justice? With οἱ 
πλούσιοι supply δοκοῦσιν. ἀναλῶσαι de- 
pends on ἐθέλειν ἄν, which represents 
ἤθελον dv. τοῦ μὴ ποιεῖν is genitive of 
purpose. Many editors omit ἐθέλειν, 
‘rand take ἂν with ἀναλῶσαι (-Ξ ἀνήλω- 
σαν dv), depending directly on δοκοῦσιν 
understood. But ἐθέλειν is in the best 
Mss., though it must be confessed that 
the sentence would be simpler without it. 

3. Kabudetvar, dropping: cf. κατα- 
βάλλοντα, ὃ 103°.—ovde: sc. μόνον. 

4: συμφέροντα θεῖναι τὸν νόμον : cf. 
πτηνὰς διώκεις τὰς ἐλπίδας, Eur. frag. 273. 

5. τῷ πεῖραν δεδωκέναι, either on my 
having given a test of it (sc. ἐμέ) or 
on the law having given a test of itself 
(sc. τὸν νόμον). It is much more natural 
to continue the subject ἐμέ from καθυ- 
φεῖναι, ἀποφυγεῖν, and θεῖναι, but usage 
favours the ellipsis of the reflexive. See 
§ 19529, ἅ ye μηδὲ πεῖραν ἔδωκε, which 
did not even give us a test of themselves; 
XXIV. 24, πεῖραν αὑτῶν πολλάκις δεδώ- 
κασιν (sc. οἱ νόμοι) ὅτι συμφέροντες ὑμῖν 
εἰσι (with αὑτῶν expressed); Thuc. 1. 
1389 (of Themistocles), ἀπὸ τοῦ πεῖραν 
διδοὺς ξυνετὸς φαίνεσθαι, i.e. on trial (sc. 
ἑαυτοῦ). Demosthenes, however, is eager 
to make his own agency prominent. 


timeless aorists which precede (M. T. 
109, 96). | 

6. ἀποστόλων: see § 8o!; and cf. IV. 
35, τοὺς δ᾽ ἀποστόλους πάντας ὑμῖν ὑστερί- 
few τῶν καιρῶν. 

7. ἱκετηρίαν (sc. ῥάβδον), suppliant’s 
bough, generally of olive, bound with 
wool, which a suppliant laid on the altar 
of a divinity whose succour he invoked. 
See Schol. on Ar. Plut. 383, ixernpia 
ἐστὶ κλάδος ἐλαίας ἐρίῳ πεπλεγμένος, and 
Hermann, Gottesdienstl. Alt. § 24, 14. 
Here παρ᾽ ὑμῖν shows that it was the 
altar in the Pnyx where the helpless 
trierarch sought the protection of the 
Assembly. Aristotle (Pol. Ath. 43), in 
describing the regular meetings of the 
Assembly, says: ἑτέραν δὲ ταῖς ixernpias, 
ἐν 7 θεὶς 6 βουλόμενος ἱκετηρίαν (ὑπὲρ) 
ὧν dv βούληται καὶ ἰδίων καὶ δημοσίων 
διαλέξεται πρὸς τὸν δῆμον. Cf. Poll. 
VIII. 96. 

8. ἐν Movvixla: ἔνθα ἐστὶν ἱερὸν Mov- 
νυχίας ᾿Αρτέμιδος " κἀκεῖ ἔφευγον οἵτινες 
τῶν τριηράρχων ἠδικοῦντο, ἢ ναῦται ἢ τινες 
τῶν ἐξεταζομένων ἐν τῷ Πειραιεῖ (Schol.). 
See Lys. XIII. 24, καθίζουσιν ἐπὶ τὸν 
βωμὸν Μουνιχίασιν. The form Μουνιχία 
is found almost exclusively in inscriptions 
of the best period. See Meisterhans, 
Gr. d. Gr. Inschr. § 13, 8 


78 ΔΗΛΛΟΣΘΕΝΟῪΣ 


An yo » a9 
τῶν ἀποστολέων ἐδέθη, ov τριήρης οὔτ᾽ ἔξω καταλειφθεῖσ᾽ 
το ἀπώλ ~ πόλει, οὔτ᾽ αὐτοῦ ἀπελείφθη οὐ δυναμένη ἀνά- 
ἀπώλετο τῇ πόλει, οὐ n μένη 
Ν Ν / 9 “A 
108 γεσθαι. καίτοι κατὰ TOUS προτέρους νόμους ἅπαντα ταῦτα 
ἐγίγνετο. τὸ δ᾽ αἴτιον, ἐν τοῖς πένησιν ἣν τὸ λῃτουργεῖν᾽ 
, δ | ns Ἵ : Ἔν ᾽ ~ 
πολλὰ δὴ τἀδύνατα συνέβαινεν. ἐγὼ δ᾽ ἐκ τῶν ἀπόρων εἰς 
νὰ 3 μὰ Ν 
τοὺς εὐπόρους μετήνεγκα τὰς τριηραρχίας: πάντ οὖν τὰ 
la) 4 ΄ 3 
ς δέοντα ἐγίγνετο. καὶ μὴν καὶ κατ᾽ αὐτὸ τοῦτο ἀξιός εἰμι 
a g A ta 
ἐπαίνου τυχεῖν, OTL πάντα τὰ τοιαῦτα προῃρούμην πολιτεύ- 
Ch RP ha) ν a \ Ν Ν τ ΄ 
ματα ἀφ᾽ ὧν ἅμα δόξαι καὶ τιμαὶ καὶ δυνάμεις συνέβαινον 
ἰοὺ / re Ν υὴ Ν % / ἠδέ 3 
τῇ πόλει: βάσκανον δὲ καὶ πικρὸν καὶ κακόηθες οὐδέν ἐστι 
΄ eX 2Q\ \ 2Q\ as / ‘Binal 
πολίτευμα ἐμὸν, οὐδὲ ταπεινὸν, οὐδὲ τῆς πόλεως ἀνάξιον. 
3 5 an Ν Ps 
Ὰ 109 ταὐτὸ τοίνυν ἦθος ἔχων ἔν τε τοῖς κατὰ τὴν πόλιν πολιτεύμασι 
/ | 


ἱ 
} 
; 
| 


ἀποστόλων O. ἐδεήθη ®. 
V6 and some others. 
(v over πὴ B. 


§ 108. 2. qv τῳ A2. 


ἃ. Gr. Inschr. § 15, 3: st 
τοῦτο At, Y. 7 


Sn nese θυ... 


9. ἀποστολέων: see Bekk. Anecd. 
435, 29: ἀποστολεῖς" δέκα τὸν ἀριθμὸν 
ἄρχοντες ἦσαν, οἱ ἐπὶ τῆς ἐκπομπῆς τῶν 
πλεουσῶν τριήρων καὶ τῶν ἀπαγομένων 
στόλων ἀποδεδειγμένοι. They were chosen 
for each occasion, and had charge of sup- 
plying the trierarchs with rigging and 
other material for the triremes from the 
public stores, and of seeing that these 
were properly restored at the end of the 
voyage. Boeckh’s Att. Seewesen, Urk. 
No. x., shows how many and serious were 
the complaints against trierarchs in regard 
to these supplies: cf. No. xiv. p. 466, 
20—25, where the ἀποστολεῖς are men- 
tioned. These documents and the pre- 
sent passage show that the symmories 
contained many men of very narrow 
means. 

g, 10. ἔξω καταλειφθεῖσ᾽, abandoned 
at sea; αὐτοῦ ἀπελείφθη, left behind in 
port. We have to decide between these 
forms and καταληφθεῖσα and ἀπελήφθη. 
But καταληφθεῖσα (which has little Ms. au- 
thority) would rather denote that the ship 


το. ἀπελήφθη D1; ἀπελείφθη Σ", L, vulg. ἀπάγεσθαι 


λειτουργεῖν Σ, L, Φ; λειτουργεῖν μὴ δύνασθαι = (yp), 
vulg.; λῃτουργεῖν Bl., Att. inscriptions: ““λειτ. only after 300 B.C.,” Meisterhans, Gr. — 
δὴ ἂν Y, O (corr.). 4. Tas om. O. 5. KATO 
καὶ (before τιμαὶ) om. V6. 8. 


καταλειφθεῖσα =, L, vulg.; καταληφθεῖσα 


δὲ πικρὸν (om. καὶ) O. 


ae 


4 ᾿ 
was caught or detained by an enemy, 
whereas the meaning obviously is that 
she was unseaworthy. See Plat. Rep. 
4068, ὑπὸ φυγῆς καταληφθέν, of a noble 
character detained and held fast for phi- 
losophy by exile. And ἀπελήφθη is still 
less suited to the case of a ship too badly 
fitted out to leave the harbour.—avrod, 
on the spot, i.e. in port, where she was 
lying: ἐν τῷ λιμένι ἀνεπισκεύαστος (Schol.). 
See Plat. Rep. 3716, αὐτοῦ μένοντας περὶ 
τὴν ἀγοράν. ‘ 

8 108. 2. τὸ δ᾽ αἴτιον, without ὅτι, 
like σημεῖον δέ and τεκμήριον δέ: cf. 
VIII. 32. ; 

4. ἀδύνατα, cases of impossibility. 

6. προῃρούμην : cf. προαίρεσις, ὃ 93°, 
and often. 

7. ϑυνάμεις, ower (of various kinds) : 
cf. 88 44°, 233°, 237°. 

8. βάσκανον, malicious: see Harpocr., 
ἀντὶ τοῦ φιλαίτιον καὶ συκοφαντικόν..--- 
κακόηθες : see 7θος, § τορ΄. 

8109. 1. ἦθος, principles (of action), 
political character: see note on ὃ 114”. 


‘2 oat hn ἀν 


proposed to crown him.—ro ydp.. 


ΠΕΡῚ 


\ 
και 


TOY ΣΤΕΦΑΝΟΥ 


io 


ἐν τοῖς Ἑλληνικοῖς φανήσομαι" οὔτε yap ἐν TH πόλει 
Ν ἴων ἴων x A - lan) 
τὰς Tapa TOV πλουσίων χάριτας μᾶλλον ἢ τὰ τῶν πολλῶν 


δίκαια εἱλόμην, οὔτ᾽ ἐν τοῖς “Ἑλληνικοῖς τὰ Φιλίππου δῶρα 


\ \ i“ > / > ~ “ A “A (aged 
καὶ τὴν ξενίαν ἠγάπησα ἀντὶ τῶν κοινῃ πᾶσι τοῖς Ἑλλησι 5 


συμφερόντων. 


Ἡγοῦμαι τοίνυν λοιπὸν εἶναί Hee περὶ τοῦ κηρύγματος 110} 
εἰπεῖν καὶ τῶν εὐθυνῶν: τὸ γὰρ ὡς τἀριστά τ᾽ ἔπραττον καὶ 


\ » Ἀ δ , > ἴω e ἴω ε ἴω 
διὰ παντὸς εὔνους εἰμὶ καὶ πρόθυμος EU ποιειν υμας, LKAVWS 


>. ~ > Ue “A , 3 

ἐκ τῶν εἰρημένων δεδηλῶσθαΐ μοι νομίζω. 
A “A / 

γε TOV πεπολιτευμένων καὶ πεπραγμένων ἐμαυτῷ παραλείπω, 5..." 


΄ὕ \ ΄, ΄ὕ 
καιτοιτα μέγιστα 


ε Ἅ “A Ν 3 ΜᾺ Ἂ \ > ~ “A 

ὑπολαμβάνων πρῶτον μὲν ἐφεξῆς τοὺς περὶ αὐτοῦ τοῦ παρα- 
A lal > ΕἾ κ᾿ 

νόμου λόγους ἀποδοῦναί με δεῖν, εἶτα, κἂν μηδὲν εἴπω περὶ 


§ 109. 42. ἐν τοῖς om. Y. τον τὰ Om. AT. 
ΤΟΣ cis -poccom. Y. 2. ws dpiora Ar, B. γε (for 7’) B. 4. Kal 
μοι (for καίτοι) At. 5. τε (for ye) O. πολιτευομένων O. 


2. ἐν τοῖς ᾿Εἰλληνικοῖς, opposed to ἐν 
τοῖς κατὰ τὴν πόλιν : see 505. 
5, ἀντί, rather than, like μᾶλλον 7 (3). 


§§ 1LO—121 contain the reply to the 
first two arguments of Aeschines, that on 
the responsibility of Demosthenes as an 
ἄρχων at the time when Ctesiphon pro- 
posed his decree (§§ 111--- 110), and that 
on the place of proclamation (§§ 120, 121). 


§ Το is introductory. §§ 122—125 area 


peroration to the division of the argument 
beginning with § 53. 

8110. τ. περὶ τοῦ κηρύγματος, i.e. about 
the place of proclamation, this being the 
only point in dispute under this head. 

2. τῶν εὐθυνῶν: this concerns only 
the question whether Demosthenes was a 
‘responsible magistrate” when Ctesiphon 
ὑμᾶς, 
i.e. the statement in Ctesiphon’s decree 
that I did etc., subj. of δεδηλῶσθαι: with 
this reference to the words of the decree 
ef. 571. 

4. τὰ μέγιστα refers especially to his 
important public services in the year 
before Chaeronea (339—338), the ac- 
count of which is reserved to the later 


division of his argument, where it comes 
in with far greater effect. 

5. παραλείπω, 7 leave aside (not ne- 
cessarily Z omzt). This whole passage, 
with the implied doubt about any future 
mention of these “greatest acts,” is full 
of rhetorical art. He has no intention 
whatever of omitting these acts or abridg- 
ing his account of them; but he skilfully 
implies that his earlier acts, already 
related, are ample for the legal justifi- 
cation of Ctesiphon, so that he could 
atford to leave his greatest achievements 
unmentioned. He also diverts attention 
from one of his main objects, that of 
concealing the weakness of his argument 
on the εὔθυναι by placing it between two 
most effective political harangues. 

6. ἐφεξῆς, 22 due order: cf. § 56°. 
In ὃ 56 οὐδὲν ἑκὼν παραλείψω is said 
with no reference to this passage, but it 
simply states his general purpose of giving 
a full account of his public life.—avrot 
τοῦ παρανόμου, the strict question of 
ellegality, with which alone the γραφὴ 
παρανόμων is properly concerned. 

7. ἀποδοῦναι: see note on ὃ 114). 


a eet 


Lad i So 


, 


a. f eZ 


80 AHMOZOENOY= 


lal ἴω / ε 4 > e ἴω ε ἊΨ Ν 
τῶν λοιπῶν πολιτευμάτων, ὁμοίως TAP ὑμῶν εκάστῳ TO 


συνειδὸς ὑπάρχειν μοι. 

Τῶν μὲν οὖν λόγων, οὺς οὗτος ἄνω καὶ κάτω διακυκῶν : 
ἔλεγε περὶ τῶν παραγεγραμμένων νόμων, οὔτε μὰ τοὺς θεοὺς 
οἶμαι ὑμᾶς μανθάνειν οὔτ᾽ αὐτὸς ἐδυνάμην συνεῖναι τοὺς 
| πολλούς: ἁπλῶς δὲ τὴν ὀρθὴν περὶ τῶν δικαίων διαλέξομαι. 

ς τοσούτῳ γὰρ δέω λέγειν ὡς οὐκ εἰμὶ ὑπεύθυνος, ὃ νῦν οὗτος 
διέβαλλε καὶ διωρίζετο, Gol ἅπαντα τὸν βίον ὑπεύθυνος 
εἶναι ὁμολογῶ ὧν ἢ διακεχείρικα ἣ πεπολίτευμαι παρ᾽ ὑμῖν. 


111 


Ἔν “0 


| 


8. ἑκάστῳ D, L, Ar. 2; ἑκάστου B, vulg. 9. ὑπάρχει Οἱ, F. 


8 111. 1. οὗτος om. V6. 
τῶν om. Al. 


last 1); διακεχείρηκα L, Y, V6. 


8, ὁμοίως, all the same.—Tap ὑμών.... 
ὑπάρχειν μοι, chat 7 may rely on ἃ con- 
sciousness of them in each of your minds: 
cf. 8 g5* and note. 

8 111. 1. τῶν λόγων, depending on 
τοὺς πολλούς.--ἄνω καὶ κάτω διακυκῶν, 
mixing them in utter confusion. See IX. 
36, ἄνω καὶ κάτω πεποίηκε, and without 
καί τι. 16, στρατείαις ταῖς ἄνω κάτω, and 
IV. 41, συμπαραθεῖτε ἄνω κάτω, up and 
down. 

2. παραγεγραμμένων : the laws which 
the indicted decree (τὸ φεῦγον ψήφισμα) 
was charged with violating were written 
on a tablet (σανίδιον) by its séde, and this 
was posted in the court-room. See 
Aesch. Ill. 200: ἐν ταῖς γραφαῖς τῶν 
παρανόμων παράκειται κανὼν τοῦ δικαίου 
τουτὶ τὸ σανίδιον καὶ τὸ ψήφισμα καὶ οἱ 
παραγεγραμμένοι νόμοι. 

4. τὴν ὀρθὴν (sc. ὁδόν), as we Say, 
straightforward: see Ar. Av. 1, ὀρθὴν 


κελεύεις;--τῶν δικαίων, the rights of the 


case, opposed to τῶν λόγων (1). 

5. τοσούτῳ δέω λέγειν, 7 am 50 far 
from saying: τοσούτῳ with δέω as with 
comparatives:.so in 1X. 17. Most Mss. 
have τοσούτου in both passages, and all 
have it in VIII. 7o. 


κυκῶν Al, Y; κυκλῶν A2; διακυκλίων above) i 
πεπραγμένων Σ, L, A2; παραγεγραμμένων = (yp); Ὑγεγραμ- 


2. 

μένων L? (mg.), At, O. 3. οἷμαι ὑμᾶς D, F, ®, O; ὑμᾶς οἴομαι L; ὑμᾶς οἶμαι AC, 
B. λανθάνειν B. συνιέναι A2. 4. αὐτῶν (after πολλοὺς) L (mg-), A2, 
F (yp), ® (yp), Y; O- τὴν ὀρθὴν Z, L, F, Φ; τὴν ὀρθὴν ὁδὸν vulg.; ὁδὸν after 
δικαίων 1, (mg.), Υ. 5.. τοσούτῳ Σ, L (ν over w), Φ; τοσούτου vulg. οὗτος 
>, L, F; οὗτος πολλάκις vulg. 7. ὧν ἤδη A2. διακεχείρικα Σ, O (ἢ over 


6. διέβαλλε καὶ διωρίζετο : see ὃ 4°. 

ἡ. ὧν. «πεπολίτευμαι, i.e. ether for 
money that I have handled ox for public 
acts that I have done. 

§ 112. The sophistical character of 
the argument of 88 112—119 explains the 
anxiety of the orator to cover its weak- 
ness by its position in the oration (see 
note on § 110°). The reply of Aeschines 
(111. 17 ff.) to this ἄφυκτον λόγον, ὅν φησι 
Δημοσθένης, probably written or greatly 
modified after hearing this passage, is 
conclusive. The law quoted by Aesch. 
(11) τοὺς ὑπευθύνους μὴ στεφανοῦν certainly 
made no exception for those who gave 
money to the state while in office. In- 
deed, this very claim is one which needed 
to be established by the εὔθυναι, in which 
it might be disputed: see Aesch. 23, ἔασον 
ἀμφισβητῆσαί. σοι τὸν βουλόμενον τῶν 
πολιτῶν ὡς οὐκ ἐπέδωκας. The claim of. 
Demosthenes at least amounts to this, 
that any officer who asserts that he has 
expended more in the service of the state 
than he received should be exempt from 
the law τοὺς ὑπευθύνους μὴ στεφανοῦν. 
The specious argument that a man cannot 
fairly be called to account for the ex- 
penditure of his own money on public 


ΠΕΡῚ TOY 2TE®ANOY 81 


= ΄, 7S δι. δ»; eae 3 ,ὔ , ‘as 
ὧν μέντοι γ᾽ ἐκ τῆς ἰδίας οὐσίας ἐπαγγειλάμενος δέδωκα TO 
δήμῳ, οὐδεμίαν ἡμέραν ὑπεύθυνος εἶναί φημι (ἀκούεις 


264 Αἰσχίνη ;) οὐδ᾽ ἄλλον οὐδένα, οὐδ᾽ ἂν τῶν ἐννέ᾽ ἀρχόντων 


τις ὧν τύχῃ. τίς γάρ ἐστι νόμος τοσαύτης ἀδικίας καὶ 

μισανθρωπίας μεστὸς ὥστε τὸν δόντα τι τῶν ἰδίων καὶ 
ne a , Ν ’ A / 

ποιήσαντα πρᾶγμα φιλάνθρωπον καὶ φιλόδωρον τῆς χάριτος 


Ν 9 lat > δ , 5» Ν , 
μεν ATOOTEPELW, ELS TOUS συκοφάντας δ᾽ αγέειν, Καὶ τουτους 


~ Ν -“ » , wa 
ἐπὶ τὰς εὐθύνας ὧν ἔδωκεν ἐφιστάναι; οὐδὲ εἷς. εἰ δέ φησιν 


«@ uA 3 \ , Ἂ, rd 3 3 9 
οὗτος, δειξάτω, κἀγὼ στέρξω καὶ σιωπήσομαι. ἀλλ᾽ οὐκ 


» » ἴων na font ο lal 
ἔστιν, ἄνδρες ᾿Αθηναῖοι, ἀλλ᾽ οὗτος συκοφαντῶν, ὅτι ἐπὶ τῷ 
Ϊ ra zy 
θεωρικῷ τότε ὧν ἐπέδωκα TA χρήματα, ἐπήνεσεν αὐτὸν, 


8 112. 4. ὁ νόμος Az. 7. εἰς δὲ τοὺς συκοφάντας δ᾽ ἄγειν D; εἰς τοὺς 
συκοφ. δ᾽ ἄγειν Αἱ, Y; εἰς δὲ τοὺς cuxod. ἄγειν L, Β, vulg. 8. δέδωκεν Ατ; 


ἔδωκαν L? (mg.). οὐδὲ εἷς Σ, AI; οὐδὲ εἷς δήπου L, vulg. 


works could not release Demosthenes 
from εὔθυναι when he had obviously had 
public money in his hands; and the 
responsibility for ¢2zs was the real obstacle 
to his receiving a crown before his εὖ- 
θυναι. 

I. ὧν μέντοι γ᾽: γε emphasizes the 
whole relative clause. We should gene- 
rally have wy γε, but μέντοι has naturally 
the second place (see Bl.).—émayyevAd- 
μενος δέδωκα, Lave offered and given, i.e. 
have given by my free act, openly de- 
area oee-&. I. Att. 11. No. 334, a 
ψήφισμα calling for voluntary contribu- 
tions els σωτηρίαν τῆς πόλεως and ordering 
a publication of the donors’ names (which 
follow). 

3. τῶν ἐννέ᾽ ἀρχόντων : the Archons, 
as the chief magistrates and as candidates 
for the Areopagus, would naturally be 
subject to special scrutiny at their εὖ- 
θυναι. 

5. μισανθρωπίας, misanthropy, op- 
posed to φιλάνθρωπον (6). 

7. εἰς τοὺς συκοφάντας : ironical al- 
lusion to εἰς τοὺς λογιστάς, as if the 
sycophants were a board of officers (hence 
τοὺς).---τούτους.. ἐφιστάναι, fo set them 
to audit the accounts etc. 


ἔν, Ὁ, 


8 118. 1. 
TOLOUTOS). 

2. ἐπὶ τῷ θεωρικῷ av, treasurer of the 
Theortc Fund: for the importance of this 
office see Aesch. III. 25, 26, ending with 
Κτησιφῶν δὲ Δημοσθένην τὸν συλλήβδην 
ἁπάσας τὰς ᾿Αθήνησιν ἀρχὰς ἄρχοντα οὐκ 


ἀλλ᾽ οὐκ ἔστιν (sc. νόμος 


᾿ ὠκνήσε γράψαι στεφανοῦν. 


3. ἐπέδωκα, properly gave in addition 
(to the public fund in his charge). Gifts 
to the state were often called ἐπιδόσεις : 
cf. § 1717.—émyverev αὐτὸν (sc. Κτησι- 
φῶν) -εἔγραψεν ἐπαινέσαι. All MSS. ex- 
cept 2 insert ἡ βουλή as subject of ἐπή- 
νεσεν. The true subject appears in l. ro, 
ταῦτ᾽ ἔγραψεν ὁδὶ περὶ ἐμοῦ. ἐπαινεῖν, 
compliment by a vote of thanks, and στε- 
φανοῦν are both used of the vote con- 
ferring the crown, which included also a 
vote of thanks: see 88 57°, 587, 85°, 11774. 
See Maximus (in Walz, Rhet. Gr. Iv. 
p- 587): οὐ δυνάμενος yap ἀντιστῆναι πρὸς 
τὸ ὅτι οὐχ ὑπεύθυνον ὄντα Κτησιφῶν ἀνη- 
γόρευσεν, ὅπερ ἄντικρυς καὶ διαρρήδην ὁ 
νόμος ἀπαγορεύει, ὀνόματος μεταθέσει τὴν 
μέθοδον παρέσχετο, ἀντὶ τοῦ ἀνηγόρευσεν 
ἐπήνεσεν elrwv,—which must refer to 
this passage. 


112 


113 


82 AHMOZOENOY2 


φησὶν, ὑπεύθυνον ὄντα. ov περὶ τούτων γ᾽ οὐδενὸς ὧν 
5 ὑπεύθυνος ἦν, ἀλλ᾽ ἐφ᾽ οἷς ἐπέδωκα, ὦ συκοφάντα. ἀλλὰ 
καὶ τειχοποιὸς ἦσθα. καὶ διά γε τοῦτ᾽ ὀρθῶς ἐπῃνούμην, 
οὐκ ἐλογιζόμην. ὁ μὲν γὰρ 
ἐξετασόντων προσδεῖται, ἡ δὲ 
δικαία ἐστὶ τυγχάνειν: διόπερ 
ὅτι δ᾽ οὕτω ταῦτ᾽ οὐ μόνον ἐν 


4 > "ants » \ 

ὅτι τἀνηλωμέν᾽ ἔδωκα καὶ 
λογισμὸς εὐθυνῶν καὶ τῶν 
δωρεὰ χάριτος καὶ ἐπαίνου 

οὐ τς, 4 εοὺν ἌΝ" A 

114 ταῦτ᾽ ἔγραψεν ὁδὶ περὶ ἐμοῦ" 
me: “ » ν Ὁ 

τοῖς νόμοις ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐν τοῖς ὑμετέροις ἤθεσιν ὠρισται, ἐγώ 


ῥᾳδίως πολλαχόθεν δείξω. πρῶτον μὲν γὰρ Ναυσικλῆς 


8 118. 4. φησὶν, ἡ βουλὴ L, Σ5, vulg.: ἡ βουλὴ om. ΣΙ, φησὶν om. At! (see Β].). 
οὐδὲν ὧν Y, O. φησί (after ἦσθα) vulg.; om. Σ, ®. διά γε τοῦτο 2, L, 
B, F, Φ; δι’ αὐτό γε τοῦτο L? (mg.), Ar. 2, vulg. τἀναλωμένα At. 2, Β (ἡ 


over 2nd a). ἔδωκα Σ, L, At, Φ; ἐπέδωκα B, vulg. (cf. §§ 112%, tid’, 1X7" 
8. ἐξεταζομένων Al. Ὁ. καὶ om. 2. ἐστὶν τυγχάνειν Σ᾿; τυγχάνειν ἐστί 


ἌΣ 25. Yo το. οδὲ (w over o) B; ὁ V6. 
§ 114. 1. οὕτως 2, L; οὕτω vulg. -- ταῦτα (bef. οὐ) Σ, L, F, &, V6; ταῦτα 
ἔχει, kal vulg. 2. ὑμετέροις >, L, Φ; ἡμετέροις vulg. ἔθεσιν Sopater, Dind. 


3. δείξω πολλαχ. A2. γὰρ om. V6. 


4. οὐ περὶ τούτων.. ἐπέδωκα: this 6. τειχοποιὸς, one of a board of com- 


argument assumes that an ordinary ὑπεύ- 
θυνος could be crowned, before passing 
his εὔθυναι, for a gift to the state which 
was not connected with his office. It is 
conceivable, and even probable, that a 
crown might be voted for such a gift to 
an officer of state, even during his term 
of office, by general consent, without 
being thought illegal, though the letter of 
the law made no exception for such a 
case. And the cases cited as precedents 
in § 114, so far as we know, may have 
been of this nature (see ὃ 117». But 
this was not the case with the gifts of 
Demosthenes. These were both closely 
connected with the funds which he held 
as an officer of state, and the argument of 
Aeschines (23) applies to them in its full 
force. Demosthenes says nothing which 
shows that Ctesiphon did not violate the 
letter and even the spirit of the law τοὺς 
ὑπευθύνους μὴ στεφανοῦν. And yet it is 
more than likely that the friends of 
Demosthenes, in their eagerness to crown 
him for his noble services, overlooked 
the technical obstacle to their action; 
and the court appears to have decided to 
overlook their oversight. 


missioners appointed to superintend the 
repairs of the city walls. 
seems to have been the same about both 
of the offices which Demosthenes held in 
337—330 B.c. The orator attempts no 
such distinction as Aesch. predicts (28— 
30), by excluding the office of τειχοποιός 
from the ἀρχαί which require εὔθυναι. 


8. τῶν ἐξετασόντων (=ol éEerdcovat), - 


men to investigate: the present would be 
simply zzvestigators, with no temporal or 
final force. ‘ 

8 114. 2. ἤθεσιν, your moral feel- 
zngs, which impel you to act thus. Some 
read ἔθεσιν with some rhetoricians here, 
and by conjecture in ὃ 275°. Aristotle 
(Eth. τι. 1, 1) thus explains ἠθική, moral: 
ἐξ ἔθους. περιγίνεται, ὅθεν καὶ τοὔνομα 
ἔσχηκε μικρὸν παρρεκλῖνον ἀπὸ τοῦ ἔθους. 
Cf. ἠθικά, mores, morals. See note on 
§ 275°. ; 

3. πολλαχόθεν δείξω: Aeschines an- 
ticipates or rather answers this argument 
in 193: λέγει δὲ ὁ φεύγων... οὐχ ὡς ἔννομα 
γέγραφεν, ἀλλ᾽ ὡς ἤδη ποτὲ καὶ πρότερον 
ἕτερος τοιαῦτα γράψας ἀπέφυγεν. ----αυσι- 
κλῆς : the general who commanded the 
well-known expedition which stopped 


The argument — 


ΠΕΡῚ TOY ZTEPANOY 83 


στρατηγῶν ἐφ᾽ οἷς ἀπὸ τῶν ἰδίων προεῖτο πολλάκις ἐστεφά- 
a: ‘al La eee 52) 9 N 9 , , ¥ \ 
votat ὑφ᾽ ὑμῶν: εἶθ᾽ ὅτε Tas ἀσπίδας Διότιμος ἔδωκε Kal 5 
᾿ td an 53 
πάλιν Χαρίδημος, ἐστεφανοῦντο-: εἶθ᾽ οὑτοσὶ Νεοπτόλεμος 
λλῶ » 3 ΄, x 2}? fe 4 ΄ 
πολλῶν ἔργων ἐπιστάτης ὦν, ἐφ᾽ οἷς ἐπέδωκε τετίμηται. 
x a a 
σχέτλιον yap ἂν εἴη τοῦτό γε, εἰ τῷ τιν᾽ ἀρχὴν ἄρχοντι ἢ 
a 8106 a ax Ν ε a) ὃ Ν \ > \ \ 9.0 2 
διδόναι τῇ πόλει τὰ ἑαυτοῦ διὰ τὴν ἀρχὴν μὴ ἐξέσται, 
| “ae δορὲ a) XN A , θ ΄ὕ Oy Jad kok 
65 ἢ τῶν δοθέντων ἀντὶ τοῦ κομίσασθαι χάριν εὐθύνας ὑφέξει. το 
4 ‘ + ΧΗΣ Ἃ 
ὅτι τοίνυν ταῦτ᾽ ἀληθῆ héyw, λέγε τὰ ψηφίσματά μοι τὰ 115 
τούτοις γεγενημένα αὐτὰ λαβών. λέγε. 


ΨΗΦΙΣΜΑ. 


| ΓΆρχων Δημόνικος Φλυεὺς, βοηδρομιῶνος ἕκτῃ μετ᾽ εἰκάδα, 
᾿ γνώμῃ βουλῆς καὶ δήμου, Καλλίας Φρεάρριος εἶπεν ὅτι δοκεῖ τῇ 5 
βουλῇ καὶ τῷ δήμῳ στεφανῶσαι Ναυσικλέα τὸν ἐπὶ τῶν ὅπλων, 
ὅτι hPnvdlay ὁπλιτῶν δισχιλίων ὄντων ἐν Ἴμβρῳ καὶ βοηθούν- 
τῶν τοῖς κατοικοῦσιν ᾿Αθηναίων τὴν νῆσον, οὐ δυναμένου Φίλωνος 
τοῦ ἐπὶ τῆς διοικήσεως κεχειροτονημένου διὰ τοὺς χειμῶνας 
᾿ πλεῦσαι καὶ μισθοδοτῆσαι τοὺς ὁπλίτας, ἐκ τῆς ἰδίας οὐσίας ἔδωκε το 


mee. ore 2, L, B, vulg.; ες τε At, Ὁ. 6. ἐστεφανοῦτο Ατ, Ο. οὑτοσὶ Σ 
~ (corr.), L, Ar. 2; οὗτος B, vulg. 8. εἴ τῶ V6; εἴ τῳ Markland, Cobet. 


"Τῇ. ἑαυτοῦ 2, L; τὰ ἑαυτοῦ τῇ πόλει vulg. 10. wpéfe 2, L, Ar. 2, vulg.; 
Α B, F (v over εὐ). 
ΝΠ 115. 1. Adye.om. Y. 2. αὐτὰ λαβών om. Az. λέγε. Σ, L! (mg.), 


τ΄ γὰρ. 
π τ- 


Ἰ 


Philip at Thermopylae in 352 B.c. Diod. ΩΣ 
‘XVI. 37; Grote XI. 414; Schaefer I. 509. 
e note on § 327. Nausicles is men- 
ioned by Aeschines (159) as the one in 
whose name Demosthenes proposed his 
decrees after the battle of Chaeronea. 

_ §. Διότιμος: mentioned in ΧΧΙ. 208 
as a rich trierarch, included by Arrian 


πολλῶν ἔργων ἐπιστάτης: pro- 
bably one of those called δημοσίων ἔργων 
ἐπιστάται by Aesch. (111. 29), specially 
appointed to direct special works. In an 
inscription (partly relafing to 338 B.C.), 
Cr I) Att: 11." 2, ‘Add: ‘No. 741, ‘crowns 
are recorded as given by the people to 
Neoptolemus, Charidemus, and Nausi- 
10, 4) among the generals whom Alex- cles and as afterwards dedicated by them 
,ander demanded after the destruction of to Athena (see Aesch. III. 46). 
Thebes. 8. σχέτλιον ἂν εἴη.. ὑφέξει: for the 
6. “Χαρίδημος: of Oreus, an adopted peculiar form of conditional sentence see 
Athenian, the object of severe invective in M. T. 503, 407. 
th κομίσασθαι implies that the re- 


Ὁ 
ong 

+ 
ΣΙ 


€ oration against Aristocrates ( 352 B.C.). ΤΟ. 


‘He was first a guerilla leader in the ser- 
ce of Athens, later one of the patriotic 
y, and was demanded by Alexander in 
—ovTocl implies that Neoptolemus 
as well known in Athens. 


ceiver has a claim on the giver: cf. ἀπο- 
δοῦναι, ὃ τοῦ, and Plat. Rep. 507 a, ἐμέ 
τε δύνασθαι αὐτὴν ἀποδοῦναι καὶ ὑμᾶς κομί- 
σασθαι. 


6---2 


84 AHMOZOENOY2 


\ > 9 / \ A \ ᾽ ral \ P 
Kal οὐκ εἰσέπραξε τὸν δῆμον, Kal ἀναγορεῦσαι TOV στέφανον 
Διονυσίοις τραγῳδοῖς καινοῖς.) 


ETEPON ΨΗΦΙΣΜΑ. 


[Εἶπε Καλλίας Φρεάρριος, πρυτάνεων λεγόντων βουλῆς γνώμῃ, 
ἐπειδὴ Χαρίδημος ὁ ἐπὶ τῶν ὁπλιτῶν, ἀποσταλεὶς εἰς Σαλαμῖνα, 
καὶ Διότιμος ὁ ἐπὶ τῶν ἱππέων, ἐν τῇ ἐπὶ τοῦ ποταμοῦ μάχῃ τῶν 
στρατιωτών τινῶν ὑπὸ τῶν πολεμίων σκυλευθέντων, ἐκ τῶν ἰδίων 
5 ἀναλωμάτων καθώπλισαν τοὺς νεανίσκους ἀσπίσιν ὀκτακοσίαις, 

δεδόχθαι τῇ βουλῇ καὶ τῷ δήμῳ στεφανῶσαι Χαρίδημον καὶ Διότιμον 

χρυσῷ στεφάνῳ, καὶ ἀναγορεῦσαι Παναθηναίοις τοῖς μεγάλοις 

ἐν τῷ γυμνικῷ ἀγῶνι καὶ Διονυσίοις τρωγῳδοῖς καινοῖς" τῆς δὲ 
ἀναγορεύσεως ἐπιμεληθῆναι θεσμοθέτας, πρυτάνεις, ἀγωνοθέτας. 


116 


117 


΄ 4 3 ΄ al \ 3 a e KX 7 

Τούτων exaotos, Αἰσχίνη, τὴς μὲν ἀρχῆς YS NPKEV 
5 - la) a = 

ὑπεύθυνος ἦν, ἐφ᾽ οἷς δ᾽ ἐστεφανοῦτο οὐχ ὑπεύθυνος. οὐκοῦν — 


οὐδ᾽ ἐγώ" ταὐτὰ γὰρ δίκαι ἐστί μοι περὶ τῶν αὐτῶν τοῖς 


χὰ x ze 

ἄλλοις δήπου. ἐπέδωκα: ἐπαινοῦμαι διὰ ταῦτα, οὐκ ὧν ὧν 
» ε Ψ ον Ν , 4 > 3 4 3 / ᾿ 
ς ἔδωκα ὑπεύθυνος. ἦρχον: καὶ δέδωκά γ᾽ εὐθύνας ἐκείνων, — 
we “" > ἈΝ ᾿. 
οὐχ ὧν ἐπέδωκα. νὴ AC, ἀλλ᾽ ἀδίκως ἦρξα: εἶτα παρών, 
ὅτε μ᾽ εἰσῆγον οἱ λογισταὶ, οὐ κατηγόρεις; 7 
7 


8 117. 2. οὐκοῦν Σ. 3. ταῦτα yap Ο. 4. καὶ ἐπαινοῦμαι Ο. ἔδω- 
κα Σ', &; ἐπέδωκα D?, L, vulg. 47 om. A2, Y. 6. ὧν ἐπέδωκα νὴ Alay ᾿ 
ἀλλ᾽ Σ, 7. δικασταὶ A2. 


od =, L, Ar; διὰ τί od B, vulg. 


μόνοι τοῖς ὑπευθύνοις λογιζόμενοι, Kal Tas 
εὐθύνας εἰς τὸ δικαστήριον εἰσάγοντες. Be- 
fore this board of auditors every magis- — 
trate had to appear for his εὔθυναι at the 
end of his term of office; and they (gene- __ 
rally as a matter of form) brought him ~ 
before a Heliastic court of 501 judges, in ~ 
which anyone might appear and accuse — 


8 117. 2. ἐφ᾽ οἷς ἐστεφανοῦτο: we 
do not know whether there was any dis- 
tinction between these decrees and that 
of Ctesiphon like that mentioned in § 113%. 
As Demosthenes identifies his own case 
absolutely with these, the question is of 
little moment. 

4. ἐπαινοῦμαιυ: cf. ἐπήνεσεν, ὃ 113°. 


6. νὴ Δί᾽, ἀλλ᾽: a more emphatic 
form in stating an objection than the 


common ἀλλὰ, vy Ala: cf. XIX. 272, XX.” 


58.—tapov: ie. detng present (as_ you 
were). ἐ 

7. μ εἰσῆγον οἱ λογισταὶ : see Aristot. 
Pol. Ath. 54, καὶ (κληροῦσι οἱ ᾽4θ.) λο- 
γιστὰς δέκα καὶ συνηγόρους τούτοις δέκα, 
πρὸς οὗς ἅπαντας ἀνάγκη τοὺς τὰς ἀρχὰς 
ἄρξαντας λόγον ἀπενεγκεῖν " οὗτοι γάρ εἰσι 


_ office. 


him of any offence connected with his 7 

His accounts of money expend 
were audited at the same time. See 
Aesch. III. 17—23. The question ris | 
βούλεται κατηγορεῖν; (Aesch. 23) w 


1 
probably asked in presence of the court | 


rt 
at the εὔθυναι of Demosthenes; and to _ 
this Aeschines did not respond. But these | 
εὔθυναι must have come several months 
after Ctesiphon’s bill had passed th 


MEP] TOY STE®ANOY 85 


Y , ἊΝ vie gg oe, ee ee 4 aA 3 po Ὄ 
| Iva τοίνυν τδηθ᾽ ὅτι αὐτὸς οὗτός μοι μαρτυρεῖ ἐφ᾽ οἷς 118 
3 ε ΄ ᾿ #2 > “ \ ree ¢ Ν , 
οὐχ ὑπεύθυνος ἣν ἐστεφανῶσθαι, λαβὼν ἀνάγνωθι τὸ ψή- 
ν ." a x , a 
φισμα ὅλον TO γραφέν μοι. οἷς yap οὐκ ἐγράψατο τοῦ 
ἃ A 3 
προβουλεύματος, τούτοις ἃ διώκει συκοφαντῶν φανήσεται. 
λέγε. ἢ. 
ΨΗΦΙΣΜΑ. 
| [ Emi ἄρχοντος Εὐθυκλέους, πυανεψιῶνος ἐνάτῃ ἀπιόντος, φυλῆς 
πρυτανευούσης Οἰνηΐδος, Κτησιφῶν Λεωσθένους ᾿Αναφλύστιος 
7 > \ / / \ / 3 
εἶπεν, ἐπειδὴ Δημοσθένης Δημοσθένους ἸΤαιανιεὺς γενόμενος ἐπι- 
μελητὴς τῆς τῶν τειχῶν ἐπισκευῆς καὶ προσαναλώσας εἰς τὰ ἔργα το 
ἀπὸ τῆς ἰδίας οὐσίας τρία τάλαντα ἐπέδωκε ταῦτα τῷ δήμῳ, καὶ 


> \ lal Qn \ 9 7 an 5 a n A 
ἐπὶ τοῦ θεωρικοῦ κατασταθεὶς ἐπέδωκε τοῖς ἐκ πασών TOV φυλῶν 
θεωροῖς ἑκατὸν μνᾶς εἰς θυσίας, δεδόχθαι τῇ βουλῇ καὶ τῷ δήμῳ τῷ 

> ν > / / / if ? a 
Αθηναίων ἐπαινέσαι Δημοσθένην Δημοσθένους Matava ἀρετῆς 
ἕνεκα καὶ καλοκαγαθίας ἧς ἔχων διατελεῖ ἐν παντὶ καιρῷ εἰς τὸν 15 


δῆμον τὸν ᾿Αθηναίων, καὶ στεφανῶσαι χρυσῷ στεφάνῳ, καὶ ava- 


[δ᾽ γορεῦσαι τὸν στέφανον ἐ ἐν τῷ θεάτρῳ Διονυσίοις τρωγῳδοῖς καινοῖς" 
τῆς δὲ ἀναγορεύσεως τ πεχήθῆναι τὸν ἀγωνοθέτην. 


ὃ 118. τ. 
ὑπεύθ. Σ. 


ἵνα ἐμοὶ νῦν Α 2. 
4. φανήσεται συκοφ. Y. 


ἴδητε =; 


εἰδῆτε =, L, vulg. 2. ovK 


Senate and had been indicted by Aeschi- 
nes, so that accusation at the εὔθυναι was 
superseded. 

For another board of ten, chosen by the 
Senate by lot from their own number, 
also called λογισταί, and for the ten εὖὔ- 
θυνοι with their twenty πάρεδροι, see 
Aristot. Pol. Ath. 48. 

§ 118. 2. ἐστεφανῶσθαι (sc. ἐμέ), 
1.6. that the proposal to crown me has 
passed the Senate: cf. ἐπήνεσεν in 
§ 113°. 

3. γραφέν μοι, proposed in my honour: 
see note on ὃ 564.—rod προβουλεύματος : 
partitive after οἷς. The meaning is, that 
he will use the omissions from the decree 
in the indictment to show the malice of 
Aeschines in prosecuting the clauses which 
he includes. 

4. ἃ διώκει συκοφαντῶν : see XXIII. 
61, συκοφαντοῦμεν τὸ πρᾶγμα. 

The orator now calls for the reading of 


the bill of Ctesiphon, ostensibly to prove 
the point just made, but perhaps chiefly 
to recall to the minds of the judges Ctesi- 
phon’s enumeration of his public services 
which the Senate has approved. In the 
following spurious decree the Archon’s 
name is wrong and different from that in 
the indictment (which is also wrong); 
and the references to the words of the 
decree made by the two orators do not 
agree with this document. 

§ 119. Here the proof of the malice 
of Aeschines, promised in § 118, is given 
on the authority of the decree just read. 
It is argued that Aeschines admits the 
gifts and their legality by his silence 
concerning them, while he brands as 
illegal the proposal to return public 
thanks for these gifts. As if the thanks 
for a legal gift might not be given in an 
illegal manner. 


a 


~~... 


86 " AHMOZOENOY2 


3 lal ἃ \ 3 / ΚΝ ΘΝ ‘ Ἂχ 5 Ν Ἂς , 
Οὐκουν a μεν ἐπέδωκα TAUT EOTLVY, ων οὐδὲν συ γέγρα- 

ἃ , ε ἘΝ A > Ν , , 
Wau a δέ φησιν ἢ βουλὴ δεῖν ἀντὶ τούτων γενέσθαι μοι, 


Aa >. "ν 2 «& Γὰ 
Ταῦυᾶττ ἔσθ a διώκεις. 


τὸ λαβεῖν οὖν τὰ διδόμενα ὁμολογῶν 


ἔννομον εἶναι, τὸ χάριν τούτων ἀποδοῦναι παρανόμων γράφει. 
ε \ / + \ “~ > x Ν ,ὔ 

ες ὁ δὲ παμπόνηρος ἄνθρωπος καὶ θεοῖς ἐχθρὸς καὶ βάσκανος 

ὄντως ποῖός τις ἂν εἴη πρὸς θεῶν; οὐχ ὁ τοιοῦτος; 


K Χ Ν x “ + ae “A θ 4, , θ \ \ 
al μὴν περὶ τοῦ γ᾽ ἐν τῷ θεάτρῳ κηρύττεσθαι, TO μὲν 
μυριάκις μυρίους κεκηρῦχθαι παραλείπω καὶ τὸ πολλάκις 


8119. 2. μοι γενέσθαι ΑἸ. 4% 


ἔννομον εἶναι ὁμολογῶν Y. 


γράφη Σ,1Τ,; 


γράφῃ vulg., Bk., Β].; γράφει Dind., Vom., West., Lips. See ὃ 121°, and note below. 


§ 120. I. 


4. παρανόμων γράφει: cf. note on 


§ 13°. See critical note. Here, and in 
nine other places in this oration, all Mss. 
have the ending -ῇ (or -7) in the second 
person singular of the present or future 
middle. See 88 1215, 1315, 140°, 198°, 
1988, 238°, 2391, 283!, 3135 (three of 
these having πολιτεύῃ). In eight places 
= has -e, while most or all other Mss. 
have -7 (or -). See §§ 828, 162°, 2457, 
2567, 2832, 2849, 290%, 310%. In both 
classes I have, not without hesitation, 
given the form -εἰ in the text. In the 
whole of Demosthenes, according to 
Vomel, there are 38 cases of -εἰ and 30 
of -y. The Greek grammarians are strong 
in their statements, that ‘‘the Attic” or 
“the ancient Attic” used the form in -e, 
except in tragedy, which had -y ; and that 
in βούλει, οἴει, and ὄψει there were no 
forms in -y. See the quotations and the 
statistics in VOmel, Demosth. Contiones, 
pp. 84—87. The writers of the fifth 
century wrote EI for both m and εἰ of 
the Ionic alphabet. The confusion in 
Athens in the fourth century between -ι 
and -e:, to which Blass calls attention, 
probably prevented the establishment of 
fixed usage in spelling the syllable in 
question in the Ionic alphabet, and both 
τι and -e. were perhaps used indifferently. 
Blass, after calling the introduction of -e 
into the tragedians, Aristophanes, or Thu- 
cydides ‘‘ widersinnig,” thus proceeds : 
‘‘Bei Demosthenes ist es gleichgiiltig, 
ob man so oder so schreibt, da der 


τὸν μὲν (for τὸ μὲν) Σ΄. 


Schriftsteller selbst beliebig bald y, bald — 


ec geschrieben haben wird.” The Mss. 
of Demosthenes certainly show great 
confusion in the spelling, which may be 
traditional. Thus in Cor. § 238° all mss. 
have διαλέγῃ, while in XXXIV. 33 2 has 
διαλέγει and others διαλέγῃ. See Blass- — 
Kiihner, §§ 43, 5, and 211, 3; Meister- 
hans, Gramm. d. Gr. Inschr. 88 το, 14, 
and 15, 2 and 3. Wecan hardly believe 
that Demosthenes himself wrote λέγηι 
and λέγει indifferently ; but it is perhaps 
impossible now to decide which he did 
write. 

8 120. 2. μυριάκις μυρίους : this 
means that 10,000 men had been crowned 
on 10,000 occasions (not 10,000 times 
10,000 men). This was justified rhetori- 
cally by the great frequency of decrees 
conferring crowns to be proclaimed in 
the theatre: the number of these on 
record shows that any law which may 
have forbidden the proclamation of 
crowns in the theatre was a dead letter. 
Blass (Einl. p. 13) cites the following 
decrees from the C. I. Att.: 1. No, 59 
(410 B.C.); 11. 10° (393 B.C.), 25£ (307 
—300 B.C.), 300 (295 B.C.), 311, 312 
(286 B.C.), 331, 341, 383) 402, 444, 445. 
In all these we find essentially the same 
language; e.g. in No. 300, [καὶ ἀνειπε]ῖν 
τὸν στέφανον Acovrlciwy τῶν ἐν ἄστΊἠει 
τραγῳδῶν τῷ ἀγῶν[ι].---τὸ πολλάκις... 
πρότερον : in the notes on § 834 (δευτέρου 
...yeyvouévov) I have given reasons for 
thinking that the crown voted on the 


ΠΕΡΙ TOY STEPANOY 87 


Ψ οἿ 5 “A 4 
αὐτὸς ἐστεφανῶσθαι πρότερον. 


ἀλλὰ πρὸς θεῶν οὕτω 


Ν > Nis ὦ , > , Y > 9 , , 
σκαιὸς εἶ Kal ἀναίσθητος, Αἰσχίνη, wor ov δύνασαι doyt- 
σασθαι ὅτι τῷ μὲν στεφανουμένῳ τὸν αὐτὸν ἔχει ζῆλον ὁ 
στέφανος, ὅπου ἂν ἀναρρηθῇ, τοῦ δὲ τῶν στεφανούντων 
“εἵνεκα συμφέροντος ἐν τῷ θεάτρῳ γίγνεται τὸ κήρυγμα; οἱ 
γὰρ ἀκούσαντες ἅπαντες εἰς τὸ ποιεῖν εὖ τὴν πόλιν προτρέ- 
πονται, καὶ τοὺς ἀποδιδόντας τὴν χάριν μᾶλλον ἐπαινοῦσι 
τοῦ στεφανουμένου: διόπερ τὸν νόμον Τοῦτον ἡ πόλις γέγρα- 


φεν. 


ΝΦΜΦΣ. 


Λέγε δ᾽ αὐτόν μοι τὸν νόμον λαβών. 
fd μ μ 


[ὋὍσους στεφανοῦσί τινες τῶν δήμων, τὰς ἀναγορεύσεις τῶν 
στεφάνων ποιεῖσθαι ἐν αὐτοῖς ἑκάστους τοῖς ἰδίοις δήμοις, ἐὰν μή 
Twas ὁ δῆμος ὁ τῶν ᾿Αθηναίων ἢ ἡ βουλὴ στεφανοῖ" τούτους δ᾽ 
ἐξεῖναι ἐν τῷ θεάτρῳ Διονυσίοις ἀναγορεύεσθαι. 


᾿Ακούεις, Αἰσχίνη, τοῦ νόμου λέγοντος σαφῶς, πλὴν 


3. ἐστεφανοῦσθαι O; στεφανοῦσθαι Spengel. 


δύνασθαι F (σαι over σθαι), B', vulg. 
Zz}, V6. ἣν 
9. ἐπαινοῦσι μᾶλλον VO. Io. 
V6. II. μοι οἵ. ΑΙ. 


: 
ἰχηοίίοη of Aristonicus in 340 Β.6., and 


proclaimed in the theatre, had been 
preceded by another, also proclaimed in 
the theatre, of which we have no other 
account than the allusion in § 83. These 
two, with the one voted on the motion of 
Demomeles and Hyperides in 338 B.c. 
(88. 222, 223), if the latter was actually 
proclaimed, justify the use of πολλάκις, 
especially after μυριάκις μυρίους. 

4. ὥστ᾽ οὐ δύνασαι: see M.T. 601 
and 584. The meaning is are you so 
stupid that you are not able? while with 


ὥστε μὴ δύνασθαι it would be are you 


stupid enough not to be able? 

5. τὸν αὐτὸν ἔχει ζῆλον, 1.6. che 
receiver of the crown feels the same pride: 
ζῆλος is emulation, pride in excelling, 
hence glorying (see §§ 217°, 273°). 

7. εἵνεκα : this Ionic and poetic form 
is often found in the best mss. of Demo- 


εἵνεκα 2, L. See note below. 
τῶν στεφανουμένων (corrected to τοῦ στεφανουμένου) 


4. δύνασαι ΣΙ L, Ar. 2, B?, &, Y; 
ὅπου X, L, A; ὅποι B, vulg. av om. 
TO κήρυγμα γίγνεται Al. 


sthenes. I have admitted it here and in 
ὃ 175° on the authority of = and L, and 
in § 144? on that of 2 and B. West. 
and Bl. adopt εἵνεκα or εἵνεκ᾽ often with- 
out MS. authority. See Sandys’s note on 
Lept. 1°. 

8. εἰς τὸ ποιεῖν εὖ : this motive is 
strongly urged in many decrees conferring 
crowns. See C. I. Att. 1. No. 251: ὅπως 
ἂν εἰδῶσι ἅπαντες ὅτι ὁ δῆμος ὁ ᾿Αθηναίων 
μέμνηται καὶ χάριν ἀποδίδωσιν ὑφ᾽ ὧν ἂν 
εὖ πάθει (πάθῃ) καὶ τιμᾷ ἐν παντὶ καιρῴ 
ἀξίως τῶν εὐεργεσιῶν. So C. I. Att. 1. 
No. 114, A, 13. 

§ 121. This short but impassioned 
outburst cannot be a reply to the long 
and confused argument of Aeschines 
(32—48). For an attempt to explain 
the real state of the case, see Essay 
I, Remarks on §§ 120, 121. 


5 


μι 


5 


121 


88 AHMOZOENOY2 


ε 


ἐάν τινας ὁ δῆμος ἢ ἡ βουλὴ ψηφίσηται" τούτους δ᾽ 26 
ἀναγορευέτω; τί οὖν, ὦ ταλαίπωρε, συκοφαντεῖς; τί 
λόγους πλάττεις ; τί σαυτὸν οὐκ ἑλλεβορίζεις ἐπὶ τούτοις ; 
5 ἀλλ᾽ οὐδ᾽ αἰσχύνει φθόνου δίκην εἰσάγειν, οὐκ ἀδικήματος 
οὐδενὸς, καὶ νόμους μεταποιῶν, τῶν δ᾽ ἀφαιρῶν μέρη, οὗς 
ὅλους δίκαιον ἣν ἀναγιγνώσκεσθαι τοῖς γ᾽ ὀμωμοκόσι κατὰ 


122 


τοὺς νόμους ψηφιεῖσθαι. 


lant ».Ο , / 
ἔπειτα τοιαῦτα ποιῶν λέγεις πόσα 


8 121. 2. ψηφίσηται Σ, L, ΑΙ. 2, Β, F, &, Ο; στεφανώσηται Σ (yp), Β (mg.), 
F (mg.), ® (mg.), vulg. 5. αἰσχυνη Σ; αἰσχύνῃ (or -νη) all other Mss. See 
§ 119%. εἰσάγειν Σ, L, Φ; εἰσάγων vulg. 6. οὐδενὸς λαβεῖν τιμωρίαν Al. 2, 


F νόμους =; νόμους τοὺς μὲν Σ΄, L, vulg. 


φιεσθε (eo ch. to eto) Σ. 


§ 122. I. 
o added) &. 


ἔπιτα (ι ch. to εἰ) 2; ἔπειτα od A2, O; εἶτα σύ Al. 
προσὰ δεῖ D; λέγεις πρὸς ἃ δεῖ B; λέγεις ἃ δεῖ vulg.; Ae wp & L1 (w. 


ἀφερῶν (αι over ε) Σ. 8. ψη- 


λέγει (later 


later yee over Xe, and 6 over mp); λέγεις πόσα δεῖ BI. 


2. τούτους δ᾽ ἀναγορενέτω (sc. ὁ κῆρυξ): 
the quoted passage πλὴν ἐὰν.. ἀνα γορευέτω 
appears to be an addition to the law 
quoted by Aeschines in 32, ἐὰν μέν Twa 
ἡ βουλὴ στεφανοῖ, ἐν Tw βουλευτηρίῳ 
ἀνακηρύττεσθαι, ἐὰν δὲ ὁ δῆμος, ἐν τῇ 
ἐκκλησίᾳ, ἄλλοθι δὲ μηδαμοῦ. This would 
mean that Aeschines read a mutilated 
law to the court, which in full would 
have told against him, and that Demo- 


’ sthenes simply supplied the omitted words 


and so ended the argument. This is 
more than we can believe either of 
Aeschines or of the court. Our trouble 
is, that we do not know what law the 
clerk read to the court at the end of 
§ 120, and therefore do not know in 
what connection the words now quoted 
by Demosthenes stood. 

4. ἑλλεβορίζεις : see Ar. Vesp. 1489, 
mt0’ ἑλλέβορον, i.e. you are mad; Hor. 
Sat. 11, 3, 166, naviget Anticyram ; 
A. Poet. 300, tribus Anticyris caput in- 
sanabile. 

5. οὐδ᾽ αἰσχύνει... εἰσάγειν : for ai- 
σχύνει (MSS. αἰσχύνῃ) see note on ὃ 119%. 
For the difference between αἰσχύνομαι 
εἰσάγειν and αἰσχύνομαι εἰσάγων, which 
in the negative form is not very important, 
see M.T. 881, 903!. This appears clearly 
in Xen. Cyr. V. 3, 21: Totro mév ovK 
αἰσχύνομαι λέγων " τὸ δὲ.. αἰσχυνοίμην ἂν 


λέγειν.---φθόνου δίκην, a set based merely 
on φθόνος, opposed to ἀδἕκήματος δίκην, 
a suit (to get redress) for an offence 
(cf. § 2793). ; 

6. τῶν δ᾽ ἀφαιρῶν μέρη, as if τοὺς μὲν 
μεταποιῶν had preceded, which is the 
reading of all Mss. except 2. The use 
of τοὺς δέ alone gives the clause the 
appearance of a sudden after-thought ; 
and, so far from showing carelessness, 
it may be a rhetorical device to give 
emphasis. The same occurs in XIX. 180: 
ὅσοι διὰ ταῦτ᾽ ἀπολώλασι παρ᾽ ὑμῖν, οἱ δὲ 
χρήματα πάμπολλ᾽ ὠφλήκασιν, and XXVII. 
9: κατέλιπε... μαχαιροποιοὺς μὲν τριάκοντα 
καὶ δύο ἢ τρεῖς, ἀνὰ πέντε μνᾶς καὶ ἕξ, τοὺς 
δ᾽ οὐκ ἐλάσσονος ἢ τριῶν μνῶν ἀξίους. See 
West., and Kriiger’s Gr. Spr. § 50, I, 12. 


7. ὅλους δίκαιον ἦν ἀναγιγνώσκεσθαι, 


ought to be read entire.—tois ye dpwpo- 
κόσι... ψηφιεῖσθαι : see Aesch. III. 6, 
ὁ νομοθέτης τοῦτο πρῶτον ἔταξεν ἐν TH τῶν 
δικαστῶν ὅρκῳ, ψηφιοῦμαι κατὰ τοὺς 
νόμους. See Dem. XIX. 179, ὀμωμόκατε 
ψηφιεῖσθαι κατὰ τοὺς νόμους καὶ τὰ ψηφί- 
σματα τὰ τοῦ δήμου καὶ τῆς βουλῆς τῶν 
πεντακοσίων, which agrees essentially 
with the first sentence of the document 
purporting to be the Heliastic oath in 
XXIV. 149, Which is probably not genuine 
as a whole (see Meier and Schémann, 


pp. 152—155)- 


ΠΈΡΙ TOY STEPANOY 89 


δεῖ προσεῖναι τῷ δημοτικῷ, ὥσπερ ἀνδριάντα ἐκδεδωκὼς 
ey ἃ κι las 
κατὰ συγγραφὴν, εἶτ᾽ οὐκ ἔχοντα ἃ προσῆκεν EK τῆς συγ- 
A / x / Ν ὃ Ν xD. > (om 
γραφῆς κομιζόμενος, ἢ λόγῳ τοὺς δημοτικοὺς, GAN οὐ τοῖς 
πράγμασι καὶ τοῖς πολιτεύμασι γιγνωσκομένους. καὶ βοᾷς 
9 ἃ εἰ 
ῥητὰ καὶ ἄρρητα ὀνομάζων, ὥσπερ ἐξ ἁμάξης, ἃ σοὶ καὶ 
τῷ σῷ γένει πρόσεστιν, οὐκ ἐμοί. καίτοι. καὶ τοῦτο, ὦ 
μέ > “ 3 \ Α / / 
ἄνδρες ᾿Αθηναῖοι. - ἐγὼ λοιδορίαν κατηγορίας τούτῳ δια- 
φέρειν ἡγοῦμαι, τῷ τὴν μὲν κατηγορίαν ἀδικήματ᾽ ἔχειν, 
- ΄“ 
ὧν ἐν τοῖς νόμοις εἰσὶν αἱ τιμωρίαι, τὴν δὲ λοιδορίαν 
βλασφημίας, ἃς κατὰ τὴν αὑτῶν φύσιν τοῖς ἐχθροῖς περὶ 
> ’ὔ / 4 3 ων Ν \ / 
ἀλλήλων συμβαίνει λέγειν. οἰκοδομῆσαι δὲ τοὺς προγόνους 
wae, ΄ ε ΄ Ss [ἡ ὃ 7΄ Εἴς γα 3 
ταυτὶ τὰ δικαστήρια ὑπείληφα οὐχ ἵνα συλλέξαντες ὑμᾶς εἰς 


la) 3 Ν A 3Q7 “ 3 / , 5 / 
ταῦτα ἀπὸ TOV ἰδίων κακῶς τἀπόρρητα λέγωμεν ἀλλήλους, 


3. ἐκ τῆς γραφῆς VO. 
§123. 1. 


τούτῳ in 2). ὦ om. Ar. 


6. προγόνους ὑμῶν At, O; mpoy. ἡμῶν A2. 


καίτοι καὶ L, vulg.; καὶ om. >, Ar, OZ 


καίτοι τούτῳ ΟἹ (om. 
ai om. Y, V6. 6. ἀν ΟὟ. 
» ς “ A 
7. Nuds At. 


§§ 122—125 are a peroration to the 
division §§ 53—125. 

§ 122. 1. πόσα: so Blass for προσὰ 
(2). 

2. τῷ δημοτικῷ: referring to Aesch. 
168—170.—@omep...cvyypadynv: we find 
‘it convenient to translate, as 7f you had 
put out a statue to be made by contract; 
but the participle with ὥσπερ (without ἄν 
or ἂν εἰ) is not conditional, as appears by 
its having οὐ (not μή) for its negative 
(M.T. 867). ὥσπερ is simply as, or as ZZ 
were, but we can seldom translate it with 
a participle without an zf. 

5. γιγνωσκομένους (with ὥσπερ) : ac- 
cus. abs. (M.T. 853): cf. “ὡς.-τἔχοντα, 
§:276%*, 

6. ῥητὰ καὶ ἄρρητα, dicenda, tacenda 
(sc. ὀνόματα), with ὀνομάζων .---ὥσπερ ἐξ 
ἁμάξης: see note on πομπείας, ὃ 118; 
and Suid. under τὰ ἐκ τών ἁμαξῶν 
σκώμματα" ἐπὶ τῶν ἀπαρακαλύπτως 
σκωπτόντων" ᾿Αθήνησι γὰρ ἐν τῇ τῶν Χοῶν 
ἑορτῇ οἱ κωμάζοντες ἐπὶ τῶν ἁμαξών τοὺς 
ἀπαντῶντας ἔσκωπτόν τε καὶ ἐλοιδόρουν... 
ὅτι ἐπὶ τῆς ἁμάξης ὀχούμεναι αἱ γυναῖκες 
αἱ τῶν ᾿Αθηναίων, ἐπὰν εἰς τὰ ᾿Ελευσίνια 


ἐβάδιζον εἰς τὰ μεγάλα μυστήρια, ἐλοι- 
δόρουν ἀλλήλας ἐν τῇ ὁδῷ" τοῦτο γὰρ ἣν 
ἔθος αὐταῖς. 

8128. 1. 
12. 

2. λοιδορίαν κατηγορίας : see note on 
§ rol. 

5. κατὰ THY αὐτῶν φύσιν, opposed 
to ἐν τοῖς νόμοις (4): the accident of 
personal nature is expressed also in συμ- 
βαίνει (6). See Bl. 

7. ταυτὶ τὰ δικαστήρια: most of 
these were in the ἀγορά, as is implied by 
Lysias, XIX. 55. 

8. ἀπὸ τῶν ἰδίων, i.e. owt of (our 
stock of) przvate enmity. For the use 
of ἀπὸ, cf. Thuc. I. 141, ἀπὸ τῶν αὑτῶν 
δαπανῶντες.---κακώς...... ἀλλήλους, abuse 
one another with lawless epithets: οἴ. 
Ar. Ach. 503, τὴν πόλιν κακῶς λέγω, 
and Dem. XIX. 220, πολλὰ καὶ φιλάν- 
θρωπα εἰπόντες Φίλιππον. ἀπόρρητα were 
epithets which it was unlawful to apply 
to a citizen: cf. Lys. x. 6, ἐρεῖ ws οὐκ 
ἔστι τῶν ἀπορρήτων ἐάν τις εἴπῃ τὸν 
πατέρα ἀπεκτονέναι" τὸν γὰρ νόμον οὐ 
ταῦτ᾽ ἀπαγορεύειν: ἀλλ’ ἀνδροφόνον 


καίτοι καὶ τοῦτο; cf. IV. 


5 


123 


Ὁ ΝΡ ee A EE eee 


124 


un 


125 


go AHMOZOENOY2 


ο ’, “Ἢ 
ἀλλ᾽ ἵνα ἐξελέγχωμεν ἐάν τις ἠδικηκώς τι τυγχάνῃ τὴν 
A : \ = 3 la) 
πόλιν. ταῦτα τοίνυν εἰδὼς Αἰσχίνης οὐδὲν ἧττον ἐμοῦ, 
ἴω ΄" ν \ 950.» “Ὁ Af 
πομπεύειν ἀντὶ τοῦ κατηγορεῖν εἵλετο. οὐ μὴν οὐδ᾽ ἐνταῦθ 
“ » 3 \ nw 
ἔλαττον ἔχων δίκαιός ἐστιν ἀπελθεῖν. ἤδη δ᾽ ἐπὶ ταῦτα 
ἴω / se 4 , 
πορεύσομαι, τοσοῦτον αὐτὸν ἐρωτήσας. πότερόν σέ τις, 
a x Ἂν ΜᾺ 8. “ὁ δὰ aA 
Αἰσχίνη, τῆς πόλεως ἐχθρὸν ἢ ἐμὸν εἶναι φῇ ; ἐμὸν δῆλον 
iy > a 5 la ς Ὰ, ε 
ὅτι. εἶτα οὗ μὲν ἦν παρ᾽ ἐμοῦ δίκην κατὰ τοὺς νόμους ὑπὲρ 
, A ¥ "5072 547 3 A »2 7 
τούτων λαβεῖν, εἴπερ ἠδίκουν, ἐξέλευιπες, ἐν ταῖς εὐθύναις, 
9 wn A > A ΕΥ̓ : , a δ᾽ 5 Ν \ 
ἐν ταῖς γραφαῖς, ἐν Tals ἀλλαις κριίσεσιν: οὐ ὃ ἐγὼ μεν 
ἀθῷος ἅπασι, τοῖς νόμοις, τῷ χρόνῳ, τῇ προθεσμίᾳ, τῷ 


g. ἐξελέγξωμεν Β. 


8124. 2. λοιδορεῖν (for πομπ.) Ο. 
on) Al. 7. ἐξέλειπες Σ; ἐξέλιπες L, vulg. 
ἘΣΘ 7. wagtAt; Y: 


οὐκ ἐᾶν λέγειν. This speech shows that 
ἀνδροφόνος, ῥίψασπις, πατραλοίας, and μη- 
τραλοίας were ἀπόρρητα, but the number 
must have been much larger. See Meier 
and Schémann, 628—632. The penalty 
for using ἀπόρρητα was a fine of 500 
drachmas, which could be recovered by a 
δίκη κακηγορίας (Lys. X. 123 Isocr. XX. 3). 

9. ἐὰν.. τυγχάνῃ. 270 it shall happen 
that anyone has wronged: the perfect 
participle is the common form for ex- 
pressing past time with τυγχάνω etc. ; ἐὰν 
ἀδικήσας τύχῃ would mean Zf he shall 
perchance wrong (M.T. 144, 147}). 

8124. τ. ἐμοῦ: with οὐδὲν ἧττον. 

2. πομπεύειν (cf, πομπείας, § 11°): 
referring to ἐξ ἁμάξης, § 122°, and λοι- 
δορίαν, ὃ 123”. 

3. ἔλαττον ἔχων ἀπελθεῖν, fo get off 
with any less (than he has given): this 
fatal principle of paying off vituperation 
in the same base coin is the weak justifi- 
cation of the scurrility which follows 
($$ 128—131) and elsewhere. Such pas- 
sages remind us that we are dealing with 
the customs of 2200 years ago. ‘The 
vituperation of Demosthenes has at least 
one advantage over that of Aeschines, 
in being free from much of the lowest 
vulgarity and indecency of his opponent. 

4. mWorepov...py; here φῇ τις; hardly 
differs from φῶμεν; the third person 


ἄν (for ἐάν) V6. 


τοῖς νόμοις At (mg. only). 


recom. ΟἿ F. 


3. δίκαίως (o over w) L?. ἐς θῇ (for 


without τις in these questions is rare 
(M. T. 289). 
6. ov, where, explained by év...xpl- 
σεσιν.---πὲρ τούτων: the Athenians 
present, as representing the whole. 
7. ἐξέλειπες (impf. only =) expresses 
habitual neglect.—ev0bvats: i.e. by bring- 
ing a suit in connection with my εὔθυναι 
(see note on ὃ 1177), like the γραφὴ 
mapampeoBelas against Aeschines (XIX.). 
8. γραφαῖς: here ordinary pzblic suzts, 
not including εἰσαγγελία, εὔθυναι, etc., 
which come under γραφαί in its wider 
sense. See note on ὃ 249”. 
§ 125. 1. οὗ 8°...d0@os, but where 7 
am scot-free, opposed to οὗ μὲν ἦν, § 124°. 
2. τοῖς νόμοις... πρότερον : these four 
grounds of immunity (explaining ἅπασιν) 
do not all exclude each other, νόμοις in 
fact including all the rest, and χρόνῳ 
being in great part identical with προ- 
θεσμίᾳ. See Weil’s note; and Arist. 
Rhet. 11]. 12, 3 and 4, where he discusses 
ἀσύνδετα, which “‘ ake one thing many” 
(τὸ ἕν πολλά), whereas a conjunction ἕν 
ποιεῖ τὰ πολλά. ---τῇ προθεσμίᾳ, the limi- 
tations of time set by law to bringing 
certain actions. Debts were outlawed in 
five years, and this limitation applied to __ 
many other cases. The mover of a law 
was personally liable to the γραφὴ mapa- | 
νόμων only one year. See Meier and 


ΠΕΡῚ TOY ZTEbANOY 91 


4 Ν 4 , 7 “ » 
κεκρίσθαι περὶ πάντων πολλάκις πρότερον, τῷ δεπώποτε 
βοότερ Ὁ μη 


ἐξελεγχθῆναι μηδὲν ὑμᾶς ἀδικῶν, τῇ πόλει δ᾽ ἢ πλέον ἢ 


ἔλαττον ἀνάγκη τῶν γε δημοσίᾳ πεπραγμένων μετεῖναι τῆς 5 


δό 3 af? 9 ,ὕ ν Ν , \ 5 Ν Ss: 
όξης, ἐνταῦθ ἀπηντηκας; OPA μὴ τουτῶν μεν ἐχθρὸς NS; 


5 Ν \ aA 
EMO’ δὲ προσποιῇ. 


3 \ lal ιν 
Επειδὴ τοίνυν ἡ μὲν εὐσεβὴς καὶ δικαία ψῆφος ἅπασι 


3. πάντων πολλάκις πρότερον X, L, Β; τούτων πολλάκις AL; πάντ. πολλ. τούτων 


πρότ. vulg. 4- 


δη πλέον Σ᾽ (corr. to δὲ πλέον) ; δὲ πλέον L, Φ; δ᾽ ἢ πλέον vulg. 


7. éuol Β F (corr. to ἐμὸς), ®; ἐμὸς L, Α΄. 2, O. 


§ 126. 1. εἰ μὲν =! (ἡ above line). 


Scho6mann, 838—84o0. Of course 2 this 
suit nothing could make Demosthenes 
personally amenable to any law, as he 
was only Ctesiphon’s advocate; but the 
meaning of ἀθῷος is that no suit could 
now legally be brought against him per- 
sonally for any of the offences with which 
he is charged before the court. He 
bitterly complains of the power given to 
Aeschines by the form of this suit to 
accuse him of crimes for which he could 
not indict him: see 88 g—16.—rT@ κεκρί- 
σθαι πολλάκις πρότερον (sc. ἐμέ) : pro- 
bably referring to the cases mentioned in 
§$ 83, 222—224, which covered import- 
ant parts of the present case. He may also 
refer toactual indictments against himself: 
for the time since Chaeronea we have his 
statement in §§ 249, 250, e.g. κατὰ τὴν 


ἡμέραν ἑκάστην ἐκρινόμην. See note on 
§ 224%. For the law forbidding new 
trials of cases already decided, see XXIV. 
55, οὐκ ἐᾷ περὶ wy ἂν ἅπαξ γνῷ δικαστή- 
ptov πάλιν χρηματίζειν. 

4. ὑμᾶς ἀδικών : ὑμᾶς shows that the 
orator could address the audience in the 
midst of a question addressed to Aeschines 
personally. 

6. ἐνταῦθα, there, referring back em- 
phatically to οὗ (ι).---ἀπήντηκας; cf. 
ἀπηντηκώς, ὃ 15°.—8pa pr...qs, sce 20 it 
that you do not prove to be thetr enemy: μή 
with the subjunctive always implies the 


future; φοβοῦμαι μὴ ἀληθές ἐστιν is [fear 


that it is true (M. T. 369). 

7. ἐμοὶ: the MSS. are divided between 
ἐμοί and ἐμός : we might have ἐμοῦ, cor- 
responding to τούτων. 


§§ 126—226. The next main divi- 
sion of the argument is devoted chiefly to 
the account of the means by which Aes- 
chines gained for Philip an entrance into 
Greece with his army, by getting up the 
Amphissian war (§§ 139—159), and of 
the measures by which Demosthenes 
opposed this joint plot of Aeschines 
and Philip (as he represents it), espe- 
cially his negotiations with Thebes in 
339—338 B.c., which led to the alliance 
of that city with Athens (§§ 160—226). 
The orator introduces these accounts by 
a general sketch of Aeschines’ life and 
that of his parents, full of offensive scur- 
rility (88 126—131), followed by a brief 
account of some of the lesser political 
offences of Aeschines (§§ 132—138). 


The orator’s account of his own politi- 
cal acts in the eventful year before the 
battle of Chaeronea, connected with his 
vigorous defence of the policy of Athens 
under his guidance in her last resistance 
to the power of Philip, is the most elo- 
quent passage in the oration. This is a 
direct continuation of the story of his 
political life which was interrupted by 
skilful design in ὃ 110. 

8126. 1. ἐπειδὴ τοίνυν κιτιλ. Thisis 
one of the few undoubted cases of ana- 
coluthon in Demosthenes. The causal 
sentence introduced by ἐπειδή goes on 
regularly through § 126, when the sudden 
turn given by the question τίς οὐκ dv... 
φθέγξασθαι; causes the orator to burst 
forth into the fierce invective which fol- 


126 


92 AHMOZSOENOYS 


δέδεικται, δεῖ δέ με, ὡς ἔοικε, καίπερ οὐ φιλολοίδορον ὄντα, 

διὰ τὰς ὑπὸ τούτου βλασφημίας εἰρημένας ἀντὶ πολλῶν β. 
ψευδῶν αὐτὰ τἀναγκαιότατ᾽ εἰπεῖν περὶ αὐτοῦ, καὶ δεῖξα 

5 τίς ὧν καὶ τίνων ῥᾳδίως οὕτως ἄρχει τοῦ κακῶς. λέγειν, καὶ 

λόγους τινὰς διασύρει, αὐτὸς εἰρηκὼς͵ ἃ τίς οὐκ ἂν ὥκνησε 

197 τῶν μετρίων ἀκθρῶπος φθέγξασθαι; -—el γὰρ Αἰακὸς 7 

Ῥαδάμανθυς ἢ Μίνως ἣν 6 κατηγορῶν, ἀλλὰ μὴ σπερμο- 

λόγος, περίτριμμα ἀγορᾶς, ὄλεθρος γραμματεὺς, οὐκ ἂν 


2. ὄντα φύσει L, Ar, vulg.; φύσει om. Σ᾽ (added above line), B, ΕἸ, &*, Y. 


6. twas XD; Twas L, B, vulg., West., 


διασύρειν AT, 2. 


$127. 2. Μίνως 7 'Ῥαδάμ. Az. 


Bl.; τίνας Ar (ὦ, V6, see Vémel), Dind., Bk. 


ἃ τίς ΣΎ vulg.; ares L. 


av om. V6. 7. ἀνθρώπων om. A2. 


lows, forgetting his leading sentence, the 
apodosis to ἐπειδὴ ... φθέγξασθαι. This 
exclamatory diversion carries him to the 
end of § 128, where we find in a changed 
form (in § 129) what would be a natural 
apodosis to ὃ 126. Hermogenes, περὶ τῶν 
ἰδεῶν (III. p. 342, W.), thus explains the 
structure of the passage: ἔστι δὲ.. ἑτέρα 
τις μέθοδος ἐνδιαθέτου λόγου καὶ μάλιστα 
τοῦ δοκοῦντος σὺν ὀργῇ προϊέναι, τὸ μηδὲ 
τὰς ἀκολουθίας σῴζειν τῶν τοῦ λόγου σχη- 
μάτων, ἀλλ᾽ οἷον ἐξίστασθαι δοκεῖν ὑπὸ 
τοῦ πάθους, οἷόν ἐστι καὶ τὸ ἐπειδὴ τοίνυν 
φιλολοίδορον ὄντα (§ 126), καὶ τὰ ἐξῆς 
πάντα μέχρι τοῦ οὐκ ἀπορῶν δ᾽ ὅ τι 
χρὴ...τοῦ πρώτου μνησθώ (ὃ 120). 
οὐδαμοῦ γὰρ ἀποδέδοται τὸ ἀκόλουθον τῷ 
σχήματι, ἀλλ᾽ ἐπιπολὺ τὸ οἷον ἀκρόχολον. 
διὸ καὶ μᾶλλον ἔμψυχος καὶ ἀληθὴς ὁ 
λόγος εἶναι δοκεῖ. This shows the futility 
of attempts to restore grammatical se- 
quence to the passage. ‘The power and 
passion of the invective in §§ 127, 128 is 
certainly augmented by the sudden break 
in the rather formal construction of ὃ 126, 
and we may well doubt whether the 
orator ever thought of the beginning of 
§ 129 as a resumption of this broken 
sentence.—H εὐσεβὴς. ψῆφος, 1.6. the 
vote which your oath and justice both 
require of you. 

4. αὐτὰ tavaykavorata, wat zs bare- 
ly necessary (to satisfy the promise in 
§ 124%,3). Cf. ἀναγκαιότατα ὃ 168". See 
Thuc. I. 90 ὥστε ἀπομάχεσθαι ἐκ τοῦ 


ἀναγκαιοτάτου ὕψους, i.e. to have the wall 
just high enough to be defensible. 

5. τίνων: sc. γενόμενος. 

6. λόγους τινὰς διασύρει, r2d7czles 
certain sayings of mine. It is hard to de- 
cide between τινὰς and τίνας. With τίνας 
it is what sayings of mine he ridicules, 1.6. 
how he ridicules my sayings. ‘The refer- 
ence is to Aesch. III. 167, ταῦτα τί ἐστιν, 
ὦ κίναιδος; ῥήματα ἢ θαύματα; also to 
72 and 209.—a@ τίς.. φθέγξασθαι; this 
interrog. rel. sentence breaks the con- 
struction. For μετρίων see ἃ 107. 

8127. 1. Αἰακὸς... Μίνως : the three 
judges of the dead in Plat. Gorg. 523 E. 

2. ὁ κατηγορῶν is subject: Vomel 
says, ‘‘Non dicit s¢ Aeacus accusare?, sed 
st accusator esset Aeacus.”—omepponoyos : 
originally a little bird which picked up 
seed from newly sown fields (Ar. Av. 232, 
579); then a man who lives by picking 
up what he can in the market and other 
places of trade, a vagabond, and generally — 
a worthless fellow; sometimes one who 
picks up and retails small scraps of 
gossip, @ babdler or prater, as applied to 
St Paul in Acts xvii. 18. Either of the 
last two meanings, or perhaps a combi- 
nation of both, suits the present passage. — 
See Harpocr. s.v.,and Eustath. in Odyss. — 
p- 1547: : 

3. περίτριμμα ἀγορᾶς, a hack of the 
market place: see Arist. Nub. 447, maple 
τριμμα δικῶν, with the explanation in 
Bekk. Anecd. p. 59, οἷον τετριμμένον ἱκα- — 


> oD 


roe ae 


wt deer ais aaa Ke 


astaminn δ 


ese 


= ve 


270 


TEP] TOY STEPANOY 


93 
5 Ν ον e's 5 ἴω 5 3 “ἡ ν 5 lal , 
αὐτὸν οἶμαι ταῦτ᾽ εἰπεῖν οὐδ᾽ ἂν οὕτως ἐπαχθεῖς λόγους 
9 vA ἴω Ss a. ο 
πορίσασθαι, ὥσπερ ἐν τραγῳδίᾳ βοῶντα ὦ γῆ καὶ ἥλιε 
καὶ ἀρετὴ καὶ τὰ τοιαῦτα, καὶ πάλιν σύνεσιν καὶ παιδείαν 
“Ὁ Ν \ 
ἐπικαλούμενον, ἡ τὰ καλὰ καὶ τὰ αἰσχρὰ διαγιγνώσκεται'" 
» > lal 
ταῦτα yap δήπουθεν ἠκούετ᾽ αὐτοῦ λέγοντος. σοὶ δὲ 
κ΄. > “« lal la an 
ἀρετῆς, ὦ κάθαρμα, ἢ τοῖς σοῖς Tis μετουσία; ἢ καλῶν 
“ἃ μὴ ΄, , ὃ , / x ἴω 3 , 

ἢ μὴ τοιούτων Tis διάγνωσις; πόθεν ἢ πῶς ἀξιωθέντι; 
A Ν ,ὔ re “ Ky la \ ε ΕῚ ἴω 
ποῦ δὲ παιδείας σοι θέμις μνησθῆναι, ἧς τῶν μὲν ὡς ἀληθῶς 

as a ¥ A ΜᾺ 
τετυχηκότων οὐδ᾽ ἂν εἷς εἴποι περὶ αὑτοῦ τοιοῦτον οὐδὲν, 
«ἃ ὃ lat aw 
ἀλλὰ Kav ἑτέρου λέγοντος ἐρυθριάσειε, τοῖς δ᾽ ἀπολειφθεῖσι 
ψ ἈΝ 5 
μὲν, ὥσπερ σὺ, προσποιουμένοις δ᾽ ὑπ᾽ ἀναισθησίας τὸ τοὺς 
ἴω »“ ν κ΄ 
ἀκούοντας ἀλγεῖν ποιεῖν ὁταν λέγωσιν, οὐ τὸ δοκεῖν τοι- 
οὕτοις εἶναι περίεστιν. 
Οὐκ ἀπορῶν δ᾽ ὅ τι χρὴ περὶ σοῦ καὶ τῶν σῶν εἰπεῖν, 
ἀπορῶ τοῦ πρώτου μνησθῶ: πότερ᾽ ὡς ὁ πατήρ σου Τρόμης 
4..--οἴομαι L. ravr’ 2, L, B, F, ®; τοιαῦτ᾽ Ar, vulg. 6. παιδίαν At 


(cf. § 1284); καὶ παιδείαν om. B. 7. ἐπικαλούμενος A2. 8. ἠκούσατ᾽ At. 


8 128. 3. πόθεν Σ', At. 2, Β, vulg.; πόθεν λαβόντι Σ'", L, B (yp), ® (yp) 
4. παιδείας Ar (cf. ὃ 127°), vulg.; παιδίας Az. μὲν ws om. O. 5. 
i. 8. τοιούτους At, Y; τούτοις V6. 


. 
“ 


αὐτοῦ 


vas πράγμασιν.---ὄλεθρος γραμματεὺς, ὦ 3. πόθεν... ἀξιωθέντι ; 


see note on 


curse of @ scribe: see IX. 31, ὀλέθρου 
Μακεδόνος (of Philip), and xXxIII. 202, 
ἀνθρώπους οὐδ᾽ ἐλευθέρους, ὀλέθρου-.--- 
οὐκ ἀν... εἰπεῖν (repr. εἶπεν av): for the 
common position of ἂν before words like 
οἵμαι, see M. T. 2201. 

4. ἐπαχθεῖς, ponderous, offensively 
pompous: cf. ἐπαχθές, offensive, § τοῦ. 


See Ar. Ran. 940, οἰδοῦσαν ὑπὸ κομπα- 


σμάτων καὶ ῥημάτων ἐπαχθῶν, of the style 
of Aeschylus. 

5. πορίσασθαι, provide one’s self with, 
bring out: ci. XIX. 186, XXXV. 41.— 


ὥσπερ ἐν τραγῳδίᾳ : see note on ὃ 13°.— 


ὦ γῆ... ἀρετὴ: thus Aesch. begins his 
peroration (260), adding καὶ σύνεσις καὶ 
παιδεία, 7 διαγιγνώσκομεν τὰ καλὰ καὶ 
αἰσχρά. 

8 128. 1. σοὶ ἀρετῆς... τίς μετουσία ; 
Ξετί σοι ἀρετῆς μέτεστιν; 

2. κάθαρμα, properly filth, offscour- 
ings, 


§ 51%. 

4. ἧς belongs to τετυχηκότων, ἀπολει- 
φθεῖσι, and προσποιουμένοις : it has a parti- 
tive force with προσποιουμένοις (7), as in 
Ar. Eccl. 871, προσποιῇ τῶν χρημάτων. 

6. κἂν... ἐρυθριάσειε: M. T. 224.— 
ἀπολειφθεῖσι: cf. ὃ 257°. 

7. ἀναισθησίας: see note on ἀναίσθη- 
τοι, § 43). 

9. περίεστιν, 22 remains for them: cf. 
περιεῖναι χρήματα, of a balance of money 
due, § 227°. See 11. 29, περίεστι ἡμῖν 
ἐρίζειν. 

8129. 2. τοῦ(-- τίνος) πρώτου μνησθῶ: 
indirect question (M.T.677).—6 πατὴρ... 
ἐδούλευε: it is a hard problem for histori- 
cal criticism to evolve the real father of 
Aeschines from this slave of a school- 
master, seen with his feet in the stocks 
or wearing a wooden collar for punish- 
ment, and the patriotic citizen described 
by his son (Aesch. 11. 147, III. 191), who 


128 


129 


94 AHMOZOENOY2 


ἐδούλευε παρ᾽ ᾿Ἑλπίᾳ τῷ πρὸς τῷ Θησείῳ διδάσκοντι γράμ- 
ματα, χοίνικας παχείας ἐχὼν καὶ ξύλον; ἢ ὡς ἡ μήτηρ, 
τοῖς μεθημερινοῖς γάμοις ἐν τῷ κλεισίῳ τῷ πρὸς τῷ 
καλαμίτῃ npw χρωμένη, τὸν καλὸν ἀβδρί ΡΣ καὶ τριτα- 


8 129. 3. ‘Edmig vulg.; ελπίδαι (5 dotted w. @ above) 2; ᾿Ελπίδᾳ (6 erased), 
A2, Or. Θησίῳ At. 4. σχοινικας (πεδας above) L. 


μήτηρ Σ, L, B, F, Φ; μήτηρ σου vulg. 
marks of correction) Σ; κλησίῳ Ar, ΟἹ; 
vulg; om. ΑἹ ; ἥρωι (ὦ above p) = 


Vit. Aesch. 2. 


κλισείῳ & ; Kol B, vulg. 6. ἥρωι 
(ἡρώῳ ?); cf. πρὸς τῷ τοῦ Καλαμίτου ἡρώῳ Apoll. 
ἀνδριάντας L; ἀνδρειάντα Α2. 


καὶ ξύλον om. VO. 
5. κλεισίῳ L, 42, Οὐ; κλεισείωι (ν. 


had died about twelve years before at the 
age of ninety-five, who lived through the 
Peloponnesian war, in which he lost his 
property, was banished by the Thirty 
Tyrants, served his country bravely in 
Asia, was one of the restorers of the 
democracy under Thrasybulus, and in 
his old age discoursed learnedly and 
wisely to his son on the early history of 
the γραφὴ παρανόμων! Fortunately De- 
mosth. speaks of the same man thirteen 
years before this, when he was still living 
at the age of ninety-four, in XIX. 281, 
where he calls Aeschines τὸν ᾿Ατρομήτου 
τοῦ γραμματιστοῦ, 5071 of Atrometus the 
schoolmaster. From this respectable sta- 
tion he has now descended to be the son 
of Tromes, a schoolmaster’s slave (see 
§ 130°). 

3. πρὸς τῷ Θησείῳ: in XIX. 240, 
Atrometus is said to have kept school 
πρὸς τῷ τοῦ “Hpw τοῦ iarpot, near the 
shrine of the Hero Physician. We have 
no means of knowing whether these refer 
to the same locality. Archaeologists 
are generally agreed that the temple now 
called the Theseum is not the famous 
building under which the bones of 
Theseus were buried; and the position 
of the real temple is unknown. The place 
of the shrine of the Hero Physician is 
likewise unknown. For this hero, the 
Scythian Toxaris, a friend of Anacharsis 
and Solon, see Essay V1. Cf. note on καλα- 
μίτης (line 5).---διδάσκοντι γράμματα: the 
γραμματιστής was ἃ teacher of γράμματα, 
reading and writing, the earlier γραμμα- 
τική. 

4. χοίνικας παχείας, crassas compedis 


(Plaut. Capt. 111. 5, 64), stocks or shackles 
for the feet: see Ar. Plut. 275, ai κνῆμαι 
δέ σου βοῶσιν ἰοὺ ἰοὺ, Tas χοίνικας Kal τὰς 
πέδας ποθοῦσαι.--- ξύλον, a wooden collar, 
worn on the neck for punishment: see 
Ar. Nub. 592, ἣν φιμώσητε τούτου ᾽ν τῷ 
ξύλῳ τὸν αὐχένα, and Lys. 681. It meant 
also stocks for the feet, and the πεντεσύ- 
ριγγον ξύλον was an instrument with five 
holes, for neck, arms, and legs. See 
Lexicon, ξύλον. 

5. τοῖς μεθημερινοῖς γάμοις, a eu- 
phemism for daylight prostitution; the 
stories of the mother of Aeschines are as 
trustworthy as those of his father (see 
88. 258, 250).--κλεισίῳ, a hut, opposed 
to a house, as in Lys. XII. 18, τριῶν ἡμῖν 
οἰκιῶν οὐσῶν... .κλείσιον μισθωσάμενοι. In 
Od. xxIVv. 208 κλίσιον (ic) refers to slaves’. 
dwellings built around the master’s house: 
ἔνθα οἱ oleae ἔην, περὶ δὲ κλίσιον θέε πάντη, 
on which see Eustathius. Here κλεισίῳ 
may be euphemistic, like γάμοις.--πρὸς 
τῷ καλαμίτῃ ἥρῳ, wear the shrine (or 
statue) of the hero καλαμίτης. The mean- 
ing of this name is very uncertain. Many 
identify this hero with the ἥρως ἰατρός of 
XIX. 249, notwithstanding strong objec- 
tions; among others, Westermann does 
this ‘‘ohne Zweifel.” If they are iden- 
tical, we may explain καλαμίτης as archer 
(bowman, or rather arrow-man), deriving 
it from κάλαμος, arrow, like ὁπλίτης from 
ὅπλον. The Hero Physician, Toxaris, 


was represented as a Scythian bowman _ 


(Lucian, Scyth. 1). 

6. τὸν καλὸν ἀνδριάντα, the pretty 
doll: see Bekk. Anecd. 394, 29 (quoted 
by Dissen), ὡς ἐν τῇ συνηθείᾳ λέγουσιν al 


ΠΕΡΙ TOY ZTEPANOY 95 


γωνιστὴν ἄκρον ἐξέθρεψέ σε; ἀλλ᾽ ws ὁ Tpinpavdys 
Φορμίων, ὃ Δίωνος τοῦ Φρεαρρίου δοῦλος, ἀνέστησεν αὐτὴν 
χ 95 ΄ : A A > , > \ \ Ν , \ 
ἀπὸ ταύτης τῆς καλῆς ἐργασίας; ἀλλὰ vy τὸν Ala καὶ 
θεοὺς ὀκνῶ μὴ περὶ σοῦ τὰ προσήκοντα λέγων αὐτὸς οὐ το 
6 5 ~ / A / ἴω \ 
προσήκοντας EMAVT@ δόξω προῃρῆσθαι λόγους. ταῦτα μὲν 130 
> 3. ΕΣ δ ας ΠΩΣ 2S. , + »QA 
οὖν ἐάσω, am αὐτῶν δ᾽ ὧν αὐτὸς βεβίωκεν ἄρξομαι" οὐδὲ 
ὀψὲ γάρ 


ποτε---, ὀψὲ λέγω; χθὲς μὲν οὖν καὶ πρώην ἅμ᾽ ᾿Αθηναῖος 


Q κυ » i 9 3 a ε an 7 a 
yap ὧν ἔτυχεν ἦν, ἀλλ᾽ οἷς ὁ δῆμος καταρᾶται. 


Ν wid 4 Ν ͵ Ἂν Ν Ν \ 
Kal ῥήτωρ γέγονεν: καὶ δύο συλλαβὰς προσθεὶς τὸν μὲν 5 
πατέρα ἀντὶ Τρόμητος ἐποίησεν ᾿Ατρόμητον, τὴν δὲ μητέρα 

na ᾿ ¥ 9 ¥ 
σεμνῶς πάνυ Γλαυκοθέαν, ἣν Ἔμπουσαν ἅπαντες ἴσασι 


7. o€ om. Y. After ce Ar, O add ἀλλὰ πάντες ἴσασι ταῦτα, κἂν ἐγὼ μὴ λέγω: 


om. 2, L!, Az, B, vulg. 
II. προῃρῆσθαι (ει over 7) B. 
8 130. 2. οὖν = (mg.), om. =. 


ἢ ws L (yp), B. Io. 


θεοὺς Σ, L; τοὺς θεοὺς vulg. 


ἀπ᾽ αὐτῶν L, vulg.; ἀϊπαυτων (in 2 lines) 


= (not aravrwv); ἀπὸ δ᾽ αὐτῶν = (γρ); «ἀλλ᾽ ἀπ᾽ αὐτῶν At. αὐτὸς om. Y'. & (yp) 
has: προηρῆσθαι λόγους. οὐδὲ yap ὧν ἔτυχεν ἦν, ἀλλ᾽ ols ὁ δῆμος καταρᾶται. ταῦτα 
μὲν οὖν παραλείψω" ἀπὸ δ᾽ αὐτών ὧν βεβίωκεν ἄρξομαι. 4. ἐχθὲς Φ. 5. γέ: 
γονεν =; om. ΑἹ. 6. ᾿Ατρόμ. ἐποί. O. 7. ὠνόμασεν (after Τλαυκ.) vulg.; 
om. 2, LL ἣν ἅπαντ. "Ἔμπ. L. 


μητέρες περὶ τῶν υἱῶν, “ὁ καλὸς ἀνδριάς 
μου." --τπριταγωνιστὴν ἄκρον, a Ζ212-ἰοῤ 
third-part-actor: see §§ 262, 265, and 
XIX. 246, 247, 337. 

7. ἀλλ᾽ ὡς: supply μνησθῶ from line 2, 
as a direct interrogative. —tpinpavArs, 
galley-piper, who gave the stroke to the 
rowers on a trireme. 

8. Δίωνος: we find Δίων Διαίτου 
Φρεάρριος (?) as trierarch in C. I. Att. 1. 
No. 804 A, ὦ 84: see also Index to Vol. 
Il. s.v. Alwy.—avéornoev: ‘‘memineris 
prostare in lupanarit Graece dici καθῆ-ς 
σθαι" (Dissen); there is also the idea of 
raising her from a low occupation. Cf. 
wuesch, 1. 41. 

ὃ 130. 2. ὧν αὐτὸς βεβίωκεν, the 
life he has himself led,=rév αὐτῷ βεβιω- 
μένων : cf. ὃ 2651, XXII. 23, τὰ τούτῳ 
βεβιωμένα, and XIX. 199, 2οο.---οὐδὲ ὧν 
ἔτυχεν ἦν, he was not even of ordinary 
parents, i.e. not of any of whom he mere- 
_ly chanced to be. ὧν ἔτυχεν is nearly 
equivalent to the common τῶν τυχόντων, 
ordinary people (ot ἔτυχον), such as might 
chance to fall in one’s way: cf. Isocr. x. 


21, εἰ εἷς ἦν τῶν τυχόντων ἀλλὰ μὴ τῶν 
πολὺ διενεγκόντων. See West. for various 
interpretations of this much disputed 
passage. He quotes Rutilius Lupus, de 
Fig. 1. 16: parentes appellat quos scitis 
non ignotos fuisse, sed huiusmodi ut 
omnes hos exsecrarentur. After such a 
statement we should naturally expect to 
hear that he was of higher than ordinary 
parentage; but here (παρὰ προσδοκίαν) 
we have ἀλλ᾽ ols ὁ δῆμος καταρᾶται added. 
In the religious ceremony before each 
meeting of the Senate and Assembly, 
a curse (apd) was invoked against certain 
classes of offensive people: see XXIII. 97, 
καταρᾶται Kad’ ἑκάστην ἐκκλησίαν ὁ κῆἢρυξ 
..el τις ἐξαπατᾷ λέγων ἢ βουλὴν ἢ δῆμον 
ἢ τὴν ἡλιαίαν, with XIX. 70. Aeschines 
himself is elsewhere included among these 
‘‘deceivers”’: see § 2825-7, καίτοι Tis... 
καταρᾶται δικαίως; 

5. δύο συλλαβὰς προσθεὶς : on the 
contrary, Demosth. probably made Tpé- 
uns (trembler) by cutting off two syllables 
from ᾿Ατρόμητος (dauzetless). 

7. Ἔϊμπουσαν, hobgoblin. 


132 


96 AHMOZSOENOY= 


καλουμένην, ἐκ τοῦ πάντα ποιεῖν καὶ πάσχειν καὶ γίγνεσθαι 
ἴω a / Ν 
131 δηλονότι ταύτης τῆς ἐπωνυμίας τυχοῦσαν: πόθεν γὰρ 
> εἰ x 9 ν 5 ’ὔ ae \ \ , 
ἄλλοθεν; ἀλλ᾽ ὅμως οὕτως ἀχάριστος εἰ καὶ πονηρὸς φύσει 
ν 9 5 ͵7 5 ὃ ,ὔὕ \ 4 3 “~ ὃ x 4 
ὥστ᾽ ἐλεύθερος ἐκ δούλου καὶ πλούσιος ἐκ πτωχου ὃιᾶ 2 
° A ΕΣ 
τουτουσὶ γεγονὼς οὐχ ὅπως χάριν αὐτοῖς EXELS, ἀλλὰ 
= 
ς μισθώσας σαυτὸν κατὰ τουτωνὶ πολιτεύει. καὶ περὶ ὧν 
Ν A 3 ᾽ὔ ε y+ ε A “ / 
μὲν ἔστι TLS ἀμφισβήτησις ὡς apa ὑπέρ τῆς πόλεως 
+ 5 7 ἃ 3 ε Ν A =) ων ἴω 5 / 
εἴρηκεν, ἐάσω" ἃ δ᾽ ὑπὲρ τῶν ἐχθρῶν φανερῶς ἀπεδείχθη 


Ψ, ‘eee, ’ὔ 
πράττων, TQAVT αναμνήησω. 


8. καὶ γίγνεσθαι Σ, L1; om. vulg. 


§ 181. 4. Tovrous Y. 
5. αὐτὸν, A2. τουτωὶ (v over wt) D5 


8182. 1. ὑμῶν om. Al. 


Tis γὰρ ὑμῶν οὐκ οἷδεν τὸν ἀποψηφισθέντ᾽ ᾿Αντιφῶντα, 


ἔχης Αι, Β; ἔχοις Ο. 
τούτων Al. 
in all Mss. +. καθαρῶς (for pavepws) A2, ®. 


ἀλλὰ καὶ A2, Φ. 
πολιτεύη Σ; -εύῃ or -εὐη 
ἐπεδείχθη Ar; ἐδείχθη Az. 


8. καὶ γίγνεσθαι : almost all editors 
omit these words, which have the best 
Ms. authority and are especially appro- 
priate to the description of Empusa. 
See Ar. Ran. 289—293: Xan. δεινόν" 
παντοδαπὸν γοῦν γίγνεται" ποτὲ μέν γε 
βοῦς, νυνὶ δ᾽ ὀρεὺς, ποτὲ δ᾽ αὖ γυνὴ 
ὡραιοτάτη τις. Dion. [μπουσα τοίνυν 
ἐστί. 

§ 181. 4. τουτουσὶ: i.e. the Athe- 
nians, as represented by the court.—ovx 
ὅπως.. ἀλλὰ : οὐχ ὅπως and οὐχ ὅτι came 
originally from οὐ λέξω ὅπως (or ὅτι), 
Iwill not speak of, I will not say that, etc., 
while the nearly equivalent μὴ ὅπως (rare) 
or μὴ ὅτι came from μὴ λέγε ὅπως (or ὅτι), 
do not mention that, etc. Usually not to 
speak of is a good English equivalent ; 
but what is πο to be spoken of may be 
either affirmed or denied. Thus here ovx 
ὅπως χάριν ἔχεις, not to mention your being 
grateful, means not only are you not grate- 
ful; but in Lys. XIX. 31, οὐχ ὅπως τὰ 
σκεύη ἀπόδοσθε, not to speak of your 
selling the furniture, means not only did 
you sell the furniture. These examples 
show the absurdity of connecting this 
construction with that of 20 modo for 
non modo non, with which of course it is 
not related inform. (See M.T. 707, 708.) 

Like most elliptical idioms, this is very 


often used where the ellipsis could not be 
supplied grammatically, and even where 
(as here) no definite ellipsis was in the 
speaker’s mind. For the occasional use 
of ὅπως like ὡς in oratio obligua, see M.T. ο 
706. 

5. πολιτεύει (MSS. πολιτεύῃ) : see note 
on § 119%. 

6. ἀμφισβήτησις ὡς εἴρηκεν : ἀμφισ- 
βήτησις, like ἀμφισβητώ and Latin dis- 
puto, refers to maintaining in a dispute. 
See Plato Rep. 476 D, ἐὰν ἀμφισβητῇ ws 
οὐκ ἀληθῆ λέγομεν, and Ter. Andr. Prol. 
18, in eo disputant contaminari non decere 
fabulas. ' 

7. ἐάσω: “ Hier ist die πομπεία aus, 
und der Redner wird ernst.” (B1.) 


§§ 182—138. Here the orator alludes 
briefly to some lesser offences of Aeschines 
which preceded the outbreak of the war 
with Philip. In ὃ 139 these are called 
slight matters compared with his conduct 
after the war began. 

8 182. 1. οἶδεν, know ογ.---ἀποψη- 
φισθέντ᾽, resected from the list of citizens. 
In 346—5 B.C. (ἐπ᾽ ’Apxtov, Harpocr. 
under διαψήφισις) a general revision of 
the lists of citizens was ordered at Athens; 
and the members of each deme wen! 
through its own list (the γραμματεῖς 


ΠΕΡῚ TOY =TEbANOY 97 


a > , } , Ν , 3 5 , > Ν 

ὃς ἐπαγγειλάμενος Φιλίππῳ τὰ vewpr ἐμπρήσειν εἰς τὴν 

πόλιν ἦλθεν; ὃν λαβόντος ἐμοῦ κεκρυμμένον ἐν Πειραιεῖ 
ἈΝ ΄ὔ lanl ε ᾽ 

καὶ καταστήσαντος εἰς τὴν ἐκκλησίαν, βοῶν ὁ βάσκανος 


᾿ ΗΝ a Ὗ 
οὗτος καὶ κεκραγὼς ὡς ἐν δημοκρατίᾳ δεινὰ ποιῶ τοὺς 5 


ἠτυχηκότας τῶν πολιτῶν ὑβρίζων καὶ ἐπ᾽ οἰκίας βαδίζων 


ἄνευ ψηφίσματος, ἀφεθῆναι ἐποίησεν. καὶ εἰ μὴ ἡ βουλὴ 


2. τὰ ὑμέτερα (after ἐμπρήσειν) vulg.; om. Σ, L, Bi, ΕἸ, ΦΙι, 3. καταλαβόντος 
V6. 5. οὗτος om. Az. 6. ὑβρίζων om. V6. 


ληξιαρχικόν) voting on each name which 
was questioned. This process was called 
διαψήφισις (διαψηφίζομαι), and the rejec- 
tion of any person on the list was called 
ἀποψήφισις (ἀποψηφίζομαι). Demosthenes 
wrote his oration against Eubulides (1.0 11.) 
for a client who had been thus rejected 
and had appealed (as every such person 
might) to a Heliastic court. (See Wester- 
mann’s introduction to that oration.) 
Antiphon was undoubtedly rejected at 
the same διαψήφισις (see Dem. LVII. 2, 
πολλῶν ἐξεληλαμένων δικαίως ἐκ πάντων 
τῶν δήμων), and afterwards offered his 
services to Philip (ἐπαγγειλάμενος Φι- 
λίππῳ). 

4. καταστήσαντος εἰς τὴν ἐκκλησίαν: 
it is hardly probable that Demosthenes 
brought Antiphon before the Assembly 
without some official authority. At the 
time of the passage of his trierarchic law 
(340 B.C.) he held the office of ἐπιστάτης 
τοῦ ναυτικοῦ (Aesch, 111. 222). Schaefer 
(11. p. 370) thinks that he was ταμίας eis 
τὰ νεώρια, an officer mentioned in C. I. 
Att. 11. Nos. 803 αἰ, 5 and 14; 811 @, 34. 
See Boeckh, Urkunden iib. d. Att. 
Seewesen, pp. 59, 62, and 535/°7. It is 
doubtful by what process Antiphon was 
thus summarily arrested: it was probably 
by μήνυσις, denunciation to the people, 
the process by which those charged with 
‘mutilating the Hermae in 415 B.C. were 
dealt with. (See Meier and Schomann, 
ῬΡ. 330—332-) Except in the rare cases 
. in which the Assembly itself undertook 
the trial (as in the μήνυσις against Phidias, 
Plut. Pericl. 31), the people either sent 
the accused to a Heliastic court for trial 


G. 1), 


or discharged him. In the case of Anti- 
phon, the appeals of men like Aeschines 
moved the Assembly to discharge him ; 
but the Areopagus interposed, and ordered 
(through the Assembly) that Antiphon be 
tried before a court, which condemned 
him to the rack and to death. See Hist. 
§ 53. Dinarchus (1. 63) says: ἐστρέ- 
βλωσαν ᾿Αντιφώντα καὶ ἀπέκτειναν οὗτοι 
(the Heliasts) τῇ τῆς βουλῆς ἀποφάσει 
πεισθέντες. See note on 8153", Aeschines 
naturally does not mention this affair. 

6. ἠτυχηκότας : referring to Anti- 
phon’s ‘‘ bad luck”? (as Aesch. called it) 
in losing his citizenship. 

7. ἄνευ ψηφίσματος, i.e. without a 
vote of the Assembly or Senate. An 
Athenian citizen, like an Englishman, 
looked upon his house as his castle. See 
XXII. 52, τότε τοίνυν (under the Thirty 
Tyrants) οὐδεὶς ἔστιν ὅστις ἀπεστερεῖτο 
τοῦ σωθῆναι ὅστις ἑαυτὸν οἴκοι κρύψειεν, 
ἀλλὰ τοῦτο κατηγοροῦμεν τῶν τριάκοντα, 
ὅτι τοὺς ἐκ τῆς ἀγορᾶς ἀδίκως ἀπῆγον. 
This is not strictly true of the Thirty, 
according to Lys. XII. 8, διαλαβόντες δὲ 
Tas οἰκίας ἐβάδιζον" καὶ ἐμὲ μὲν ξένους 
ἑστιῶντα κατέλαβον. In extraordinary 
cases officers of the state with proper 
authority could search private houses and 
arrest persons concealed therein. See 
[XLVII.] 38, 53, for houses entered by the 
authority of the Senate. Pollux (VIII. 50) 
implies that an officer called in to effect 
ἐφήγησις could enter a house to make 
the arrest. (See Meier and Schoémann, 
pp- 784, 785, with note 99.)--ἀφεθῆναι: 
Antiphon was at first discharged by the 
Assembly without a trial. 


7 


—— Ὁ ΨΘΘΝΝ 


a; 


eee | as 


ca 


ee ae 


98 ΔΗΛΛΟΣΘΕΝΟῪΣ 


ε 5 3 »" 4 Ν A 3 ᾽ Ν Ν ε 4 
ἡ ἐξ ᾿Αρείου πάγου, TO πρᾶγμα αἰσθομένη καὶ τὴν ὑμετεραν 
= 3 3 / a > a 3 4 ἣν 
ἄγνοιαν ἐν οὐ δέοντι συμβεβηκυϊαν ἰδοῦσα, ἐπεζήτησε τὸν 
>» \ A 5 / ε ε ~ > » 3 
ἄνθρωπον καὶ συλλαβοῦσα ἐπανήγαγεν ὡς Upas, ἐξήρπαστ 
Ὁ ε a Ν Ν ΄ὕ aA Ν 3 rs bm a) 
sav 6 τοιοῦτος καὶ τὸ δίκην δοῦναι διαδὺς ἐξεπέπεμπτ av 
ὑπὸ τοῦ σεμνολόγου τουτουί: νῦν δ᾽ ὑμεῖς στρεβλώσαντες 
134 αὐτὸν ἀπεκτείνατε, ὡς ἔδει γε καὶ τοῦτον. τοιγαροῦν εἰδυῖα 
ag ¢« \ ε 3 3 ᾿ Υ͂ / ͵ὔ 4 
ταῦθ᾽ ἡ βουλὴ ἡ ἐξ ᾿Αρείου πάγου τότε τούτῳ πεπραγμένα, 
χειροτονησάντων αὐτὸν ὑμῶν σύνδικον ὑπὲρ τοῦ ἱεροῦ τοῦ 


᾿. 


8188. 2. ἡμετέραν =! (ἡ ch. to ὑ). 5. ἐξεπέμπετ᾽ ἂν MSS., Bk. ; ἐξεπέ- 
meumr’ ἂν Cobet (conj.), Dind., Vom., West., Lips., Bl. (om. av). 6. σεμνο- 
| λογουμένου Y, F (yp). τούτου Ατ.2, Υ. 
: 8 184. 2. τότε Σ, B; τὰ τότε L, vulg. 3. ὑμῶν τότε VO. 


ςτὸ —— Ὑπ “5 ὺΡΡ ΦΦ" 


Ses 


| 
: 


8 188. 3. ἐν οὐ δέοντι (neut.), w7- 
seasonably, just when it should not: or 
ἀνηλώκαμεν εἰς οὐδὲν δέον, 111. 28.—oup- 
βεβηκυῖαν ἰδοῦσα, seeing that wt had 
occurred (or. obl. M.T. 904).—émelytnee, 
i.e. ordered a new (ἐπ-) investigation of 
the man’s case. The Areopagus in these 
later times seems occasionally to have 
revived a part of its ancient power of 
directing the general welfare of the state. 
It could act through a rescript (ἀπόφασι5) 
addressed to the Assembly, either on its 
own initiative (αὐτὴν προελομένην) or by 
special authority of the Assembly: see 
Dinarch. I. 50, ἀνάγκη τὴν βουλὴν τὴν ἐξ 
᾿Αρείου πάγου κατὰ δύο τρόπους ποιεῖσθαι 
τὰς ἀποφάσεις πάσας. τίνας τούτους; ἤτοι 
αὐτὴν προελομένην, ἢ ζητήσασαν τοῦ δήμου 
προστάξαντος αὐτῇ. Meier and Schomann 
suggest that in this case the Areopagus 
acted under its regular jurisdiction in 
cases of incendiarism (πυρκαϊά). 

4. συλλαβοῦσα shows that the Areo- 
pagus itself ordered Antiphon’s arrest: 
Plutarch (Dem. 14) says that Demosth. 
arrested him and brought him before the 
Areopagus.—os ὑμᾶς, i.e. before the 
court, which passed the sentence of death 
(6). But ἐπανήγαγεν implies that the 
Areopagus brought him back to some 
place, and this must be the Assembly. 
See the Scholia: κυρίως εἶπε τὸ ἐπανή- 
γαγεν, εἰς τὸν αὐτὸν τόπον αὖθις κατέ- 
στησεν αὐτὸν ἡ βουλὴ ἐξ οὗ σέσωσται 
πρότερον. He was probably sent back 


to the Assembly with an ἀπόφασις, pro- 
viding that he should be brought before 
the court for trial. This is the view of 
Meier and Schémann (p. 424, note) and 
Westermann. ; 

5. δίκην δοῦναι διαδὺς: all notice 
the intentional alliteration.—éfemémeparr’ : 
this slight change from ἐξεπέμπετ᾽ gives 
a form symmetrical with ἐξήρπαστ᾽ : ἄν 
would generally be omitted here (M.T. 
226). 

6. σεμνολόγου: see note on ὃ 357.— 
vov, as ἐξ τυας.---στρεβλώσαντες : torture 
(Bdcavos) could not legally be inflicted on 
an Athenian citizen; but Antiphon was 
now  disfranchised. On the liability of 
others to the βάσανος, see, Meier and 
Schémann, pp. 896—898. In Ar. Ran. 
628, Dionysus, disguised as ἃ slave, 
claims exemption from examination under 
torture as an immortal God: ἀγορεύω τινὶ 
ἐμὲ μὴ βασανίζειν ἀθάνατον ὄντ᾽. ῤ 

γ. ὡς ἔδει γε καὶ τοῦτον (sc. ἀπο- 
κτεῖναι), as you ought to have dealt with 
this man (Aesch.). 

§ 184. 3. σύνδικον... Δήλῳ: about 
343 B.C. the Delians contested the ancient 
right of Athens to administer the temple 
of Apollo. on their island. The case 


came before the Amphictyonic Council, — 


probably in the spring of 343, when 


Demosth. was one of the Athenian dele- Ὁ 


gates to Delphi (xrx. 65). The As- 
sembly chose Aeschines as their counsel ; 
but the Areopagus, to which the people 


ΠΕΡῚ TOY STEPANOY 


ων 


3 ΄ aS A 3. Νὰ 3 7 ἊΣ Ν oh 

ev Δήλῳ ἀπὸ τῆς αὐτῆς ἀγνοίας ἤσπερ πολλὰ προΐεσθε 

_ τῶν κοινῶν, ὡς προείλεσθε κἀκείνην καὶ τοῦ πράγματος 5 
κυρίαν ἐποιήσατε, τοῦτον μὲν εὐθὺς ἀπήλασεν ὡς προδότην, 

 Ὑπερείδῃ δὲ λέγειν προσέταξε: καὶ ταῦτ᾽ ἀπὸ τοῦ βωμοῦ 

ay: φέρουσα τὴν ψῆφον ἔπραξε, καὶ οὐδεμία ψῆφος ἠνέχθη 
τῷ μιαρῷ τούτῳ. καὶ ὅτι ταῦτ᾽ ἀληθῆ λέγω, κάλει τούτων 
τοὺς μάρτυρας. 


135 


MAPTTPES. 


[Μαρτυροῦσι Δημοσθένει ὑπὲρ ἁπάντων οἵδε, Καλλίας Σουνιεὺς, 
Ζήνων Φλυεὺς, Κλέων Φαληρεὺς, Δημόνικος Μαραθώνιος, ὅτι τοῦ 5 
δήμου ποτὲ χειροτονήσαντος Αἰσχίνην σύνδικον ὑπὲρ τοῦ ἱεροῦ 
τοῦ ἐν Δήχῳ εἰς τοὺς ᾿Αμφικτύονας συνεδρεύσαντες ἡμεῖς ἐκρίναμεν 
« 7 " 3 ca) ς \ a ͵ , \ 
Ὑπερείδην ἄξιον εἶναι μᾶλλον ὑπὲρ τῆς πόλεως λέγειν, καὶ 


_ also, and given it power, etc.). 
| = 


_ refer to the association of the two bodies 
af 


ἀπεστάλη “Trrepeidns. | 


Οὐκοῦν ὅτε τούτου μέλλοντος λέγειν ἀπήλασεν ἡ βουλὴ 


4. ἀγνοίας ἧσπερ Σ, L, Ε, Φ; ἀγν. ἧσπ. ἕνεκα At; ἀγν. ἀφ᾽ ἧσπερ B, vulg. 


προΐεσθε vals. ; προεῖσθε (over προϊεσθεὶ L (yp); 
3 προσείλεσθε H -Wolf, Dind., Bk., Lips., BI. 
πῤπερείδῃ, 2s ATs “Ῥπερίδῃ L, A2, ue; 
dinvéxOn Φ, 

Κάλει 2, L, A2, B, Y, Φ, Ο ; κάλει μοι vulg. 
μέλλοντος λέγειν Ei; vulg.; μέλλοντος (corr. from λέγοντος) w. λέγειν added, 2; 
αὐτὸν (after ἀπήλασεν) vulg.; om. 2, L. 


(ει overt), ® 
καὶ (before Τοῦ) oni. -¥'. 7. 
vulg.; Ὑπερείδην B (so Lips.). 8. 

8195. 1. 


5. προείλεσθε MSS., West. ; 


Io. 
λέγοντος B, F, Φ, Dind. 


προεῖσθε Al; πρόεισθε A2; προῖστε Σ 
“Tre plonv 


, ΄ 
τούτων τούτων Σ. 


had given authority to revise the election, 


rejected him and sent Hyperides in his 
place. This showed that the tide had 
turned against Macedon. Hyperides then 


_ delivered his eloquent λόγος Δηλιακός at 


Delphi, and gained the case for Athens. 
See Hist. § 54. 

4. ἀπὸ... ἧσπερ (see G. 1025): cf. 
XXI. 155, ὅτε κατὰ ταύτην τὴν ἡλικίαν ἦν 
ἣν (for καθ᾽ ἣν) ἐγὼ νῦν, and XXII. 30, 
περὶ τοῦ πράγματος αὐτοῦ οὗ (sc. περὶ) 
oe” τὸν νόμον. (West.) 


giving it the right to revise your choice 


(lit. when you had previously chosen it 
καὶ in 
“κἀκείνην, which seems awkward, must 


in power: in H. Wolf’s emendation, προσ- 
είλεσθε, προσ- would have the same force 
as καί. The ἀπόφασις of the Areopagus 
here was of the second kind mentioned 
by Dinarchus (quoted in note on § 133°), 
τοῦ δήμου προστάξαντος αὐτῇ. See ἀπέ- 
φηνεν, ὃ 135). 

7. λέγειν προσέταξε: i.e. as the σύνδι- 
kos of Athens. —d1ro τοῦ βωμοῦ : the most 
solemn form of voting, here on a religious 
question. See XLIII. 14, λαβόντες τὴν 
ψῆφον καιομένων τῶν ἱερείων, ἀπὸ τοῦ Bw- 


5. ὡς προείλεσθε κἀκείνην, i.e. when μοῦ φέροντες τοῦ Διὸς τοῦ φρατρίου. Cf. 
you had previously associated it (the Are- Ηαΐ. vit. 123; Plut. Them. 17; Cic. 
_ Opagus) wzth yourselves in the case, i.e. pro Balbo v. 12. 


8. ἠνέχθη : like φέρουσα (above). 

9. τούτῳ: cf. ἐμοὶ τὴν ψῆφον ἤνεγκαν, 
[SAGX Fer τ. 

8 135. 10. τούτου μέλλοντος λέγειν, 


when he was to be the speaker, i.e. after 


[2 


| 


O 


136 


5 


IO 


137 


100 AHMOZOENOY2 


\ i4 Foes / Ν , οὺ \ 
καὶ προσέταξεν ἑτέρῳ, τότε καὶ προδότην εἶναι καὶ κα- 
κόνουν ὑμῖν ἀπέφηνεν. 

Ἕν μὲν τοίνυν τοῦτο τοιοῦτο πολίτευμα τοῦ νεανίου 
τούτου, ὅμοιόν γε---οὐ γάρ;---οἷς ἐμοῦ κατηγορεῖ" ἕτερον 
A 32 - Ψ Ν ᾽ὔὕ ῳ » x 
δὲ ἀναμιμνήσκεσθε. ὁτε yap Πύθωνα Φίλιππος ἔπεμψε τὸν 
Βυζάντιον καὶ παρὰ τῶν αὑτοῦ συμμάχων πάντων συνέ- 
πεμψε πρέσβεις, ὡς ἐν αἰσχύνῃ ποιήσων τὴν πόλιν καὶ 
, 5 as ΤΕ Lies \ A , ff 
δείξων ἀδικοῦσαν, TOT ἐγὼ μὲν τῷ Πύθωνι θρασυνομένῳ 
\ lanl ὌΝ ΠῚ ΠΕ ἴω 5 ε τ 5 a Ἂς 
καὶ πολλῷ ῥέοντι Kal ὑμῶν οὐχ ὑπεχώρησα, ἀλλ᾽ ἀναστὰς 
5 A \ \ an / / 3 Si ΣΝ » 3 3 
ἀντεῖπον καὶ τὰ τῆς πόλεως δίκαι᾽ οὐχὶ mpovowKa, ἀλλ 
ἀδικοῦντα Φίλιππον ἐξήλεγξα φανερῶς οὕτως ὥστε τοὺς 
ἐκείνου συμμάχους αὐτοὺς ἀνισταμένους ὁμολογεῖν" οὗτος 
δὲ συνηγωνίζετο καὶ τἀναντία ἐμαρτύρει τῇ πατρίδι, Kal’ 


aNd ie 


_ 


ταῦτα ψευδῆ. 


οὗ > 3 Vd A 3 Ν Ν “9 
Καὶ οὐκ ἀπέχρη ταῦτα, ἀλλὰ πάλιν μετὰ ταῦθ᾽ ὕστερον : 


Ir. εἶναι ὅτ. ®. 
8186. 1. Towlroom. V6. 3- 


; αὑτοῦ L; αὐτοῦ most MSS. 


5. αἰσχινη Σ' (ει ch. to v), ΟἹ. as 
§§ ror, 118"); οὐκ εἶξα οὐδ᾽ ὑπεχώρησα Vulg. 
8.187. 1. ἀλλὼ Σ, L, Al.2, Β, F; ἀλλὰ καὶ vulg. 


υ 


cere vem 


his election: τούτου λέγοντος would be 
when he was the speaker (elect), but this 
use of λέγω may well be questioned. 

12. ἀπέφηνεν, declared him to be 
so by its ἀπόφασις. 

8 186. 1. νεανίου: this sometimes 
(as here) expresses wantonness or inso- 
lence, like veavixds. See Eur. Alc. 679, 
ἄγαν ὑβρίζεις, καὶ νεανίας λόγους ῥίπτων 
ἐς ἡμᾶς, κιτ.λ. 

2. οὐ γάρ; this sarcastic question 
(after ye) implies ἃ self-evident ab- 
surdity, which is heightened by calling 
this affair with Antiphon a πολίτευμα of 
Aesch. and so comparing it with the sro- 
λιτεύματα of Demosth. (see next note). 
West. quotes XXI. 209, XXII. 73, XXIII. 
162, 186.—ots ἐμοῦ κατηγορεῖ : probably 
-- τοῖς ἐμοῦ πολιτεύμασιν οἷς κατηγορεῖ. 

3. Πύθωνα: this eloquent orator was 
sent to Athens by Philip 343 B.c., to 


ἀναμιμνήσκεσθαι (αι corr. to €) 2. ae 
πάντων >, 11, Ar; ἁπάντων L?, B, vulg. 
οὐχ ὑπεχώρησα L, B, F; οὐκ ὑπεχ. Σ (εἴ. 


Ὁ 
αυτου 


quiet apprehension and to repeat as- 
surances of the king’s friendly spirit. 
Python was a scholar of Isocrates and an 
accomplished writer: see Anon. Life of 
Isocrates, p. 257° (West.) and Aesch. II. 
125, ἐπὶ τῷ γράφειν μέγα Ppovwy. See 
Hist. §§ 55—57- 

6. θρασυνομένῳ, with his insolent 
manner. 

7. πολλῷ ῥέοντι καθ᾽ ὑμῶν, rushing 
upon you with a flood (of eloquence). 
See Thuc. II. 5, ὁ ᾿Ασωπὸς ποταμὸς ἐρρύη 
μέγας, and Ar. Eq. 526 (of Cratinus), 
ὃς πολλῷ ῥεύσας ποτ᾽ ἐπαίνῳ διὰ τῶν 
ἀφελῶν πεδίων ἔρρει. All quote Hor. Sat. 
1. 7, 28, salso multoque fluenti, with the 
preceding ruebat flumen ut hibernum. 
See § 199, πολὺς ἔγκειται.---οοὐχ ὑπεχώ- 
ρησα, did nvt retreat (before the flood). 

το. συμμάχους: 1.6. the τῶν συμμά- 
χων πρέσβεις οἵ]. 5. 


TOY ZTEPANOY 


ΠΕΡΙ IOI 


᾿ 3 A / Ν > \ 4 Lt ha 
| Αναξίνῳ τῳ κατασκόπῳ συνιὼν εἰς τὴν Θράσωνος οἰκίαν 
| > , ’ ν ‘a ε Ν ~ ,ὔ , 
273 ἐλήφθη. καίτοι ὅστις τῷ ὑπὸ τῶν πολεμίων πεμφθέντι 
' ,ὕ δον , \ la Ὁ Cae,” ε A 
μόνος μόνῳ συνῇει καὶ ἐκοινολογεῖτο, οὗτος αὐτὸς ὑπῆρχε 
ΤΥ \ a i NF ὦ 
τῇ φύσει κατάσκοπος Kal πολέμιος TH πατρίδι. καὶ ὅτι 5 


gp  ; a l4 ᾿ς ie x / 
ταῦτ᾽ ἀληθῆ λέγω, κάλει μοι τούτων TOUS μάρτυρας. 


MAPTTYPES. 


[Τελέδημος Κλέωνος, Ὑπερείδης Καλλαίσχρου, Νικόμαχος 
Διοφάντου μαρτυροῦσι Δημοσθένει καὶ ἐπωμόσαντο ἐπὶ τῶν στρα- 
τηγῶν εἰδέναι Αἰσχίνην ᾿Ατρομήτου Κοθωκίδην συνερχόμενον τὸ 
νυκτὸς εἰς τὴν Θράσωνος οἰκίαν καὶ κοινολογούμενον ᾿Αναξίνῳ, ὃς 
ἐκρίθη εἶναι κατάσκοπος παρὰ Φιλίππου. αὗται ἀπεδόθησαν αἱ 
μαρτυρίαι ἐπὶ Νικίου, ἑκατομβαιῶνος τρίτῃ ἱσταμένου. 


Μυρία τοίνυν ἕτερ᾽ εἰπεῖν ἔχων περὶ αὐτοῦ παραλείπω. 138 
Ν᾿ \ ν »Ὰ 4 > “Δ 5 X\ » ie » 
καὶ γὰρ οὕτω πως ἔχει. πόλλ᾽ ἂν ἐγὼ ETL τούτων ἔχοιμι 
an ® a Σ val a 
δεῖξαι, ὧν οὗτος κατ᾽ ἐκείνους TOUS χρόνους τοῖς μὲν ἐχθροῖς 
ε las 3 \ 2 5 , ε V4 3 3 3 , a 
ὑπηρετῶν ἐμοὶ δ᾽ ἐπηρεάζων εὑρέθη. ἀλλ᾽ ov τίθεται ταῦτα 
silie ba er) A , 2Q> A ΝΥ 3 \ 3 Ν 
Tap ὑμῖν εἰς ἀκριβῆ μνήμην οὐδ᾽ ἣν προσῆκεν ὀργὴν, ἀλλὰ 5 
δεδώκατ᾽ ἔθει τινὶ φαύλῳ πολλὴν ἐξουσίαν τῷ βουλομένῳ 
τὸν λέγοντά τι τῶν ὑμῖν συμφερόντων ὑποσκελίζειν καὶ 


A A >, AN A , ε σι ἈΝ , 
συκοφαντεῖν, TNS €7L TALS λοιδορίαις ἡδονῆς και χάριτος 


2. ἀναξεινῳ Σ, L; ᾿Αξείνῳ Y; ᾿Αξίνῳ F and Φ (yp); ᾿Αναξίνῳ all edd. 
4. συνήει Σ. 6. ἀληθὲς 1,. 


8 138. 1. τοίνυν om. L. ἕτερ᾽.. αὐτοῦ om. ®1. 2. ἐγὼ νῦν vulg.; 
νῦν om. 2, L. 4. πείθεται (τι over mre) L. 7. τι περὶ τῶν Φ. 
8187. 2. ᾿Αναξίνῳ : Aeschines (11. 8 188. 2. οὕτω πως, somewhat as 


223, 224) charges Demosthenes with  (/o//ows, where earlier writers would use 
causing the arrest and death of Anaxinus, ὧδε. 
and even with twice torturing him with 3. 


ὧν : assimilated to τούτων from ἅ, 
his own hand, though he had once been 


cognate object of ὑπηρετῶν and ἐπηρεά- 


the man’s guest at Oreus. Aesch. reports 
the oft-quoted reply of Demosth. to the 
charge of violation of hospitality: ἔφησθα 


yap τοὺς τῆς πόλεως ἅλας περὶ πλείονος 


ποιήσασθαι τῆς ξενικῆς τραπέζης. Anaxi- 
nus is said to have come to Athens (pro- 
bably in 341—340) to make purchases 
for Olympias, Philip’s queen. 

4: αὐτὸς ὑπῆρχε... κατάσκοπος, he 


_ was to be assumed to have the nature of a 
spy himself. See note on § 954. 


fwv: for the latter see ἐπήρειαν, § 12°. 

5. ἣν προσῆκεν ὀργὴν (with eis): 
τίθεται εἰς ὀργήν naturally follows the 
familiar τίθεται εἰς μνήμην. 

7. ὑποσκελίζειν, 2712 up (cf. σκέλη). 

8. τῆς... ἡδονῆς καὶ χάριτος : abusive 
language (λοιδορία) not only pleased the 
populace, but also gratified their whims 
and low tastes. A good example of 
both ἡδονή and χάρις is the scene in the 
Assembly when the second embassy re- 


102 AHMOSOENOY2 


Ν ~ / ὃ 3 / / cm 7. 3 
τὸ τῆς πόλεως συμφέρον ἀνταλλαττόμενοι: διόπερ ῥᾷόν ἐστι 
10 καὶ ἀσφαλέστερον ἀεὶ τοῖς ἐχθροῖς ὑπηρετοῦντα μισθαρνεῖν 

Ἃ Ν ἘΣ.» ΒΝ eva / , , 

ἢ τὴν ὑπὲρ ὑμῶν ἑλόμενον τάξιν πολιτεύεσθαι. 

Ν XN Ν Ἂν Ἂς lal lal ἴω ἣν» 
139 Καὶ τὸ μὲν δὴ πρὸ τοῦ πολεμεῖν φανερῶς συναγωνί- 

/ * \ > ~ Ἁ Ν “A Ἂν » 
ζεσθαι Φιλίππῳ δεινὸν μὲν, ὦ γῆ καὶ θεοὶ,---πῶς γὰρ ov ;— 

Ν “ "6 / 3 > / 4, 8 > A A 
κατὰ τῆς πατρίδος" δότε δ᾽, εἰ βούλεσθε, δότ᾽ αὐτῷ τοῦτο. 2 
ἀλλ᾽ ἐπειδὴ φανερῶς ἤδη τὰ πλοῖ᾿ ἐσεσύλητο, Χερρόνησος 

> “A ΟΝ" \ > \ 5 , > Ψ > Goa kad > 
5 ἐπορθεῖτο, ἐπὶ τὴν ᾿Αττικὴν ἐπορεύεθ᾽ ἄνθρωπος, οὐκέτ ἐν 
> , Ν , ΣΕ. 3 > ΤῊΣ ΄ / 
ἀμφισβητησίμῳ τὰ πράγματ᾽ ἦν, ἀλλ᾽ ἐνειστήκει πόλεμος, 
ὅ τι μὲν πώποτ᾽ ἔπραξεν ὑπὲρ ὑμῶν ὁ βάσκανος οὗτος 


9. ἀντικαταλλαττόμενοι AT, Y, Φ (γρ). 
ἐπορεύεθ᾽ ἅνθρ. F, Φ; ἐπορευετό ἄνθρ. 2; 


10. ailei 2, L. 


ἐνιστήκει (i.e. ἐνειστ.) V6. i. Te 


§ 189. 4. ἐσύλητο V6. ἘΣ 
ἐπορ. ὁ avos L. 6. 7vom. Y. 
mor At. οὗτος >, L, Ar, B; οὑτοσὶ vulg. 


ported in July 346 B.c., described in XIX. 
44—46. Demosthenes was insulted and 
jeered at by Aeschines and Philocrates, 
to the delight of the people: notice the 
single sarcastic remark of Demosthenes 
(46), καὶ ὑμεῖς ἐγελᾶτε. 

Il. τὴν..-«πολιτεύεσθαν is 20 serve the 
state as a patriot, opposed to rots ἐχθροῖς 
ὑπηρετοῦντα μισθαρνεῖν. 


§§ 189—159. Next follows the ac- 
count of the conduct of Aeschines in 
stirring up the Amphissian war in 339 
B.C. (See note on §§ 126—226.) 88 139— 
144 are introductory, and 88 158, 159 are 
a peroration. 

δ 139. The first sentence depreciates 
the acts already mentioned, done in time 
of nominal peace, to heighten the enor- 
mity of helping Philip in time of war: 
cf. δότε αὐτῷ τοῦτο (3). 

I. πρὸ τοῦ πολεμεῖν φανερῶς: this 
implies that the preceding peace was 
really a state of war. See 1X. 19, ἀφ᾽ ἧς 
ἡμέρας ἀνεῖλε Φωκέας, ἀπὸ ταύτης ἔγωγ᾽ 
αὐτὸν πολεμεῖν ὁρίζομαι. Cf. φανερῶς in 
ΜΠ: 

3. κατὰ τῆς πατρίδος: not connected 
in construction with δεινὸν, but an inde- 
pendent exclamation, justifying the asser- 
tion in δεινὸν μὲν. 

4. ἐπειδὴ... ἐπορθεῖτο, after your ships 


had been openly seized (§ 73) and the 
ravaging of the Chersonese was going on: 
for ἐσεσύλητο see note on ὃ 42. The 
ravaging of the Chersonese was the out- 
rage of marching an army through the 
Athenian territory there to enable his 
fleet to pass the Hellespont for the siege 
of Perinthus without molestation from 
the Athenians on the shore. See Schae- 
fer 11. 499, 500, and Hist. § 66 (end). 
The passage may refer also to the attack 
on the Chersonese after the siege of 
Byzantium: Hist. § 67 (end). 

5. émityv Αττικὴν ἐπορεύεθ᾽ : Philip’s 
action at the Hellespont, if it had not 
been checked, would have opened the 
way for him into Attica and the whole of 
Greece. Demosth. had repeatedly warned 
the people of this peril: even in the First 
Philippic (351 B.C.) he had said (50), κἂν 
μὴ νῦν ἐθέλωμεν ἐκεῖ πολεμεῖν αὐτῷ, 
ἐνθά δ᾽ ἴσως ἀναγκασθησόμεθα τοῦτο ποι- 
εἶν. See especially VI. 35 (344 B.C-), 
Πύλας... ὧν καταστὰς ἐκεῖνος κύριος τῆς ἐπὶ 
τὴν ᾿Αττικὴν ὁδοῦ καὶ τῆς εἰς Πελοπόννη- 
σον κύριος γέγονε, and further τοῦ πρὸς 
τὴν ᾿Αττικὴν πολέμου, ὃς λυπήσει μὲν ἕκα- 
στον ἐπειδὰν παρῇ, γέγονε δ᾽ ἐν ἐκείνῃ τῇ 
ἡμέρᾳ. See ὃ 143%. 

6. ἐνειστήκει πόλεμος: cf. ὁ ἐνστὰς 
πόλεμος, ὃ 805. These words end the 
clause with ἐπειδή. 


MEP! TOY 2TEPANOY 103 


> ἣν > x »» ~ | i 3» » A“ 
ἰαμβειογράφος οὐκ av ἔχοι δεῖξαι, οὐδ᾽ ἔστιν οὔτε μεῖζον 
M De i > > A 3 ’ὔ ε Ν la 4 

οὔτ᾽ ἔλαττον ψήφισμ᾽ οὐδὲν Αἰσχίνῃ ὑπὲρ τῶν συμφερόντων 


τῇ πόλει. εἰ δέ φησι, νῦν δειξάτω ἐν τῷ ἐμῷ ὕδατι. 
καίτοι δυοῖν αὐτὸν ἀνάγκη θάτερον, ἢ 


> » 50. “ 
Οουκ ἐστιν οὐδέν. 


ἀλλ᾽ 


8. ἰαμβειογράφος Σ, Ο (corr.), vulg., VGm., West., Lips.; ἰαμβιογράφος ᾧ, V6; 
ἰαμβογράφος Art; ἰαμβειοφάγος = (yp), 1, (γράφος over φάγος), Dind., Bk., Bl. For 
ἰαμβοφάγος see Hermog. (III. pp. 241, 242, 344 W.), Etym. Magn. p. 463, Bekk. 


Anec. p. 2653; ἰαμβειοφάγος and ἰαμβειομάχος B (yp). 
9. ὑπὲρ 2, L; περὶ vulg. 
ért 2, L, B, F, Az, ®, O, Vom. (see his note), Lips. rt. 


ἂν ἔχοι At. 


566 Vomel’s note. οὐδ᾽ 
10. év Ar, Dind., Bk., West., Bl.; 
ἀνάγκη αὐτὸν At, Y. 


8. ἰαμβειογράφος, wrzter of lampoons 
(ἰαμβεῖα), probably refers to verses written 
by Aeschines in his youth, to which he 
perhaps alludes in I. 136, περὶ δὲ τῶν 
ποιημάτων ὧν φασιν οὗτοί με πεποιηκέναι. 
This reading was restored by Vomel (see 
his elaborate note), on the best Ms. au- 
thority, in place of ἐαμβειοφάγος, eater (or 
mouther) of iambics, which was and is the 
common reading. If we read ἰαμβειοφάγος, 
we must refer it to the career of Aeschi- 
nes as an actor, not to his λοιδορία, to 
which the ancient interpreters generally 
referred it. See Etym. Magn. Ἰαμβο- 
φάγος, λοίδορος᾽ ἐπειδὴ tauBos ἔμμετρός 
ἐστι λοιδορία. ὁ φαγὼν οὖν, ἐν τῷ στόματι 
ὁ ἔχων τοὺς ἰάμβους, τουτέστιν ὁ ἔχων διὰ 
στόματος τὴν φιλολοιδορίαν"... τάχα καὶ πα- 
ραπαίζων εἰς τὸν Αἰσχίνην, ὅτι τὰ ἰαμβεῖα 

᾿ τῆς τραγῳδίας ἔλεγεν ὑποκριτὴς ὦν. Cf. 
Bekk. Anecd. p. 2654. Weil quotes the 
Patmos Schol.: λέγουσι τοὺς ἀσαφῶς 
ἀναγιγνώσκοντας τρώγειν τὰ λεγόμενα 
(swallow their words), Bekk. Anecd. 
p- 190°, ἰαμβοφάγον τὸν πταίοντα λέ- 
γουσιν, probably refers to bad delivery: 
cf. § 267%, ῥήσεις ἃς ἐλυμαίνου. West. 
denies that any of these interpretations 
of ἰαμβειοφάγος suits the present passage, 
and finds support for ἰαμβειογράφος in the 
following οὐδ᾽ éorw...cuupepdvTwy τῇ πό- 
λει (8). Much may be said for both read- 
ings. The forms with éauBeo- and those 
with dauBo- are equally good. 

9. Alo xtvy, dat. of possession: he 
has none to show. 

Io. ἐν τῷ ἐμῷ ὕδατι, i my time: this 
general formula and ἐπὶ τοῦ ἐμοῦ ὕδατος 
are often used when a speaker offers part 


of his own time to his opponent to prove 
something which he believes cannot be 
proved. It is a mere challenge, made 
with no idea of its being accepted. For 
the genitive with ἐπὶ see LVII. 61 (end). 
The best mss. have here ἐπὶ.. ὕδατι, 
which Vimel adopts. Shilleto (note on 
XIX. 57, p. 359°) says of this passage, 
‘read ἐν." ‘‘érl genitivum postularet,” 
says Dindorf. The time allotted to each 
speaker in most cases was measured by 
the clepsydra or water-clock (Dict. Antiq. 
under Horologium), a fixed number of 
ἀμφορεῖς of water being poured in accord- 
ing to the importance of the case. Thus 
Aeschines (II. 126) says, πρὸς ἕνδεκα γὰρ 
ἀμφορέας ἐν διαμεμετρημένῃ TH ἡμέρᾳ Kpl- 
νομαι, eleven ἀμφορεῖς (about 100 gallons), 
allowed each speaker in cases of παρα- 
πρεσβεία, being the largest amount men- 
tioned. In some cases, as the γραφὴ or 
δίκη κακώσεως, called δίκαι ἄνευ ὕδατος, 
no limit was set (see Harpocr. under 
kakwoews). The term διαμεμετρημένη 
ἡμέρα is explained in Aesch. III. 197. 
In important public suits, like the γραφὴ 
παρανόμων, the day was divided into three 
parts, and the clepsydra was filled three 
times, the first measure of water being 
given to the accuser, the second (of equal 
amount) to the accused, and the third (in 
ἀγῶνες τιμητοί, if the accused was con- 
victed), a smaller measure, to the τίμησις, 
or consideration of the amount of the 
penalty, ὅ τι χρὴ παθεῖν ἢ ἀποτίσαι. 

11. δυοῖν... θάτερον : there is no infini- 
tive or other verb to be supplied. See 
Gerth-Kiihner, Ausf. Gram. § 406, Anm. 
10. δυοῖν θάτερον (or θάτερα), ἀμφότερον 


104 ° AHMOZOENOY2 


μηδὲν τοῖς πραττομένοις ὑπ᾽ ἐμοῦ τότ᾽ ἔχοντ᾽ ἐγκαλεῖν, μὴ 
γράφειν παρὰ ταῦθ᾽ ἕτερα, ἢ τὸ τῶν ἐχθρῶν συμφέρον 
ζητοῦντα μὴ φέρειν εἰς μέσον τὰ τούτων ἀμείνω. 

*Ap οὖν οὐδ᾽ ἔλεγεν, ὥσπερ οὐδ᾽ ἔγραφεν, ἡνίκ᾽ ἐρ- 
γάσασθαί τι δέοι κακόν; οὐ μὲν οὖν εἰπεῖν ἦν ἑτέρῳ. καὶ 
τὰ μὲν ἄλλα καὶ φέρειν ἠδύναθ᾽, ὡς ἔοικεν, ἡ πόλις καὶ ποιῶν 
οὗτος λανθάνειν: ἕν δ᾽ ἐπεξειργάσατο, ἄνδρες ᾿Αθηναῖοι, 
τοιοῦτον ὃ πᾶσι τοῖς προτέροις ἐπέθηκε τέλος: περὶ οὗ τοὺς 
πολλοὺς ἀνήλωσε λόγους, τὰ τῶν ᾿Αμφισσέων [τῶν Λοκρῶν] 


14. τὸ μέσον A2, Y. 
8 140. 2. 


ΣΙ, L; ἦν εἰπεῖνε Σ5, vulg.; εἰπεῖν om. B. 


>> 


4. Kal...\avOdvew Σ᾽; ἃ...ἐλάνθανεν =", L, vulg. 
᾿Αμφισέων Σ (but ᾿Αμφισσεις ὃ 1507). 


Σ,1,, Ar, F, O; ὦ ἄνδρ. vulg. 6. 


κακόν Σ, L, B, ΕἸ, @!; κακὸν ὑμᾶς vulg. (ἡμᾶς Az). 


εἰπεῖν ἦν 
ὡς om. Zt. 
ἄνδρες 


3. ἠδύνασθ᾽ ἜΣ: 
ἐξειργάσατο A2. 


Λοκρῶν] so West., Lips., Bl.; om. Y; καὶ Λοκρῶν Ag. 


or ἀμφότερα, οὐδέτερον, and similar expres- 
sions, may stand emphatically, as ad- 
verbial phrases, before 7...7, καὶ... καὶ, 
Te...T€, and in other cases where we 
simply say ezther...or, both...and, etc. 
See Plat. Theaet. 187 B, ἐὰν οὕτω dpw- 
μεν, δυοῖν θάτερα, ἢ εὑρήσομεν ἐφ᾽ ὃ ἐρχό- 
μεθα, ἢ ἧττον οἰησόμεθα εἰδέναι ὃ μηδαμῇ 
ἴσμεν. So Il. 111. 170, ἀμφότερον, βα- 
σιλεύς τ᾽ ἀγαθὸς κρατερός τ᾽ αἰχμητής. Cf. 
Tipe res, Ode χνογδ: 9 Aesch α1: 
234; and below § 171% In English 
these expressions are usually included in 
our either or both. In such cases we 
must not ascribe to the wztenzporal Greek 
infinitives (here γράφειν and φέρειν) the 
definite time which we are obliged to give 
them when we translate them by finite 
verbs. With ἀνάγκη supply ἣν, he was 
obliged. 

12—14. μηδὲν... ἔχοντ᾽ and τὸ.. ζη- 
τοῦντα are οδι158].---παρὰ ταῦθ᾽ expresses 
opposition, not mere addition. Fox (p. 
149) thus states the dilemma: ‘‘ Aeschines 
konnte oder wollte mit keinem Eintrag 
einkommen.” 

8 140. dp’ οὖν... ἔγραφεν ; οὐδ᾽... οὐδ᾽ 
correspond to καὶ... καὶ in positive expres- 
sions of this kind (West.). We cannot 


express such negatives: the meaning is, 
as he proposed no measures, so did he also 
abstain from talking (so netther did he 


talk)? The sins of omission just described 
set these of commission in a stronger 
light. 

2. οὐ pev...erépw, why, nobody else 
could get a chance to talk! 

4. ἐπεξειργάσατο: the idea of addi- 
tion, which ἐπί (like mpés) expresses, is 
further extended by ἐπέθηκε τέλος, capped 
the climax. 

5. τοὺς πολλοὺς λόγους, Ais many 
words, referring to the long and brilliant 
passage (III. 107—129) in which Aeschines 
describes his doings at Delphi when he 
stirred up the fatal Amphissian war. Cf. 
Aeschyl. Ag. 1456, μία τὰς πολλὰς, τὰς 
πάνυ πολλὰς ψυχὰς ὀλέσασ᾽. : 

6. τὰ τῶν ᾿Αμφισσέων δόγματα, che 
decrees (of the Amphictyons) about the 
Amphissians, like τὸ Μεγαρέων ψήφισμα, 
the Megarian decree, Thuc. 1. 140, called 


in 1. 139 τὸ περὶ Μεγαρέων ψήφισμα. 80 


τούτων ψήφισμα, ΧΧ.ττ5.---[τῶν Λοκρῶν]: 
the forms οἱ Λοκροὶ οἱ ᾿Αμφισσεῖς (Aesch. 
III. 113), οἱ ᾿Αμφισσεῖς Λοκροί (like οἱ 
Ὀζόλαι οὗτοι Λοκροί, Thuc. Il. 95), 
and Λοκροὶ οἱ ᾿Αμφισσεῖς (like Λοκρῶν 


τῶν ᾿Οὗολῶν, ibid.) are all justified (see 


Vomel’s note). V. retains the Ms. text 


here, but explains it as the genitive of οἱ 


᾿Αμφισσεῖς of Λοκρῶν. Two MSS. omit 
τῶν Aoxpwy, which West. brackets. 


[rev © 


pee, να 


2 


διεξιὼν δόγματα, ὡς διαστρέψων τἀληθές. 


275 


ΠΕΡΙ TOY ΣΤΕΦΑΝΟῪ 105 


Ας 3 5 
Τὸ © ov τοῖς 
A / > / 5 fA 3 > 4 \ 5 ~ la 
οὔτόν ἐστι. πόθεν; οὐδέποτ᾽ ἐκνίψει σὺ τἀκεῖ πεπραγμένα 
σαυτῷ: οὐχ οὕτω πόλλ᾽ ἐρεῖς. 
A > 7 ἴω A a 
Καλῶ δ᾽ ἐναντίον ὑμῶν, ἄνδρες ᾿Αθηναῖοι, τοὺς θεοὺς 

ν Ss , ν 3, 
ἅπαντας καὶ πάσας ὅσοι τὴν χώραν ἔχουσι τὴν ᾿Αττικὴν, 

Ν ες τὰ ae Ν 50 ἃ aiid > Ἂ / \ 
καὶ τὸν ᾿Απόλλω τὸν Πύθιον, ὃς πατρῷός ἐστι TH πόλει, καὶ 

A ἴω la 3, 
ἐπεύχομαι πᾶσι τούτοις, εἰ μὲν ἀληθῆ πρὸς ὑμᾶς εἴποιμι καὶ 
> \ ee A ς a > 
εἶπον Kal TOT εὐθὺς ἐν τῷ δήμῳ, OTE πρῶτον εἶδον τουτονὶ 
XN Ἂς ἴω 3 
τὸν μιαρὸν τούτου τοῦ πράγματος ἁπτόμενον (ἔγνων yap, 
ΕΝ σι 

εὐθέως ἔγνων), εὐτυχίαν μοι δοῦναι καὶ σωτηρίαν, εἰ δὲ πρὸς 
ἊΨ θ x X / ἐδί ν 3 Tay, Sas ΄, δῆ 
ἐχθραν ἢ φιλονεικίας ἰδίας ἕνεκ᾽ αἰτίαν ἐπάγω τούτῳ ψευδῆ, 


, κ᾿ 3 κ᾿ 5. τ a 
TAVT@V Τῶν ἀγαθῶν ἀνόνητόν με ποιῆσαι. 


‘6 > er a 5 , \ ὃ 7 ε Ν ὃ ἴω 
Tt οὖν Tavt ETYPAMAL και OLETELVAMLYV ουτωσι apo pos; 


7. διαστρέφων ΟἹ. 8. πολλοῦ γε καὶ δεῖ (after πόθεν ;) = (yp), vulg.; om. 
ΞΡ Ar, B, F. ἐκνίψῃ (or -7). MSS. 

§ 141. ἄνδρες 2; ὦ ἄνδρ. vulg. πάντας Y. Se καὶ τότ Se ὩΣ 
καὶ vulg. τοῦτον At; τουτοὶ (corr. to τουτονὶ) >. 7. εὐθύς O. 8. εἵνεκα 
i. 9g. avdnrov A2, Ὁ]. με γενέσθαι V6. 


7. τὸ δ᾽, but in fact: this τὸ δέ, with 
no correlative τὸ μέν, is common in 
Plato, introducing an adversative state- 
ment. See Apol. 23 A, οἴονταί με...εἶναι 
σοφόν" τὸ δὲ κινδυνεύει. So Rep. 340 D 
(end), 357 Α.---οὐ τοιοῦτόν ἐστι, i.e. this 
cannot be done (the case ts not of such a 
nature, that etc.), referring to ws διαστρέ- 
ψων τἀληθές. 

8. πόθεν; cf. ὃ 4γ5.---ἐκνίψει : cf. Act. 
Apost. xxii. τό, ἀπόλουσαι τὰς ἁμαρτίας 
σου, wash away thy sins. For the form 
of ἐκνίψει, see note on ὃ 1194. 

8 141. The solemn invocation in this 
chapter, resembling those which begin 
and end the exordium (§§ 1, 8), calls 
attention again to the gravity of the 
charge about to be made, and to the 


‘Supreme importance of the events which 


led to the fatal issue on the field of 
Chaeronea. He defends his invocation 
and his general earnestness in 88 142— 
144. 

_ 3. πατρῷος: Apollo was the paternal 
God of Athens, not only as the great 
Ionic divinity, but as the father of Ion 


(according to Athenian belief). See 
Harpocr. under ᾿Απόλλων, and Schol. on 
Ar. Ay. 1527, πατρῷον δὲ τιμῶσιν ᾿Απόλ- 
Awva ᾿Αθηναῖοι, ἐπεὶ Ἴων, ὁ πολέμαρχος 
᾿Αθηναίων, ἐξ ᾿Απόλλωνος καὶ Κρεούσης 
τῆς Ξούθου ἐγένετο. So in the Ion of 
Euripides. 

4. εἰ ἀληθῆ εἴποιμι Kal εἶπον, lit. 27 
case I should speak the truth to you now 
and did speak it then on the spot: a 
double condition combining a future and 
a past supposition (M.T. 509). We 
should rather invert the order and say, 
if 7 then spoke the truth and (shall) speak 
wt again now. 

7. πρὸς ἔχθραν, with a view to enmity: 
cf. διὰ... ἔχθραν in ὃ 143%. 

8. φιλονεικίας, contentiousness (against 
an enemy). 

9. ἀνόνητον: cf. XIX. 315, ὥστε ἀνό- 
yntov ἐκεῖνον ἁπάντων εἷναι τών ἀγαθών. 

8142. 1. ἐπήραμαι: referring to the 
whole invocation of § 141, but especially 
to the zmprecaczon in the last clause. τί 
ταῦτ᾽ ἐπήραμαι; is why have 7 made this 
imprecation ? while τί διετεινάμην οὑτωσὶ 


141 


142 


106 AHMOZOENOY2 


Ψ / > » 5 “~ ὃ , / > - a > 

OTL γράμματ᾽ ἔχων ἐν τῷ δημοσίῳ κείμενα, ἐξ ὧν ταῦτ 

ἴω a) 4 

ἐπιδείξω σαφῶς, καὶ ὑμᾶς εἰδὼς τὰ πεπραγμένα μνημονεύ- 

σοντας, ἐκεῖνο φοβοῦμαι, μὴ τῶν εἰργασμένων αὐτῷ κακῶν 

ε A a 9 , 4 / / 4 NX 

5 ὑποληφθῃῇ οὗτος ἐλάττων: ὁπερ πρότερον συνέβη, OTE τοὺς 

ἴω a> 

! ταλαιπώρους Φωκέας ἐποίησεν ἀπολέσθαι τὰ ψευδῆ δεῦρ 

" 3 aA > 

: 143 ἀπαγγείλας. τὸν yap ἐν ᾿Αμφίσσῃ πόλεμον, dv ὃν εἰς 

Ἐλάτειαν ἦλθε Φίλιππος, καὶ δι’ ὃν ἡρέθη τῶν ᾿Αμφικτυόνων 
ε \ ἃ 4 > > , Ἂν “ ε d\n a » > 

ἡγεμὼν ὃς ἅπαντ᾽ ἀνέτρεψε TA τῶν Ἑλλήνων, οὗτος ἐστιν 
- ¥ 

| ὁ συγκατασκευάσας καὶ πάντων εἷς ἀνὴρ μεγίστων alTLos 
nw ‘ lan Ν Lal 

ς κακῶν. καὶ τότ᾽ εὐθὺς ἐμοῦ διαμαρτυρομένου καὶ βοῶντος 

> ~ 5 ‘a / > \ > Ἂς 3 / 
ἐν τῇ ἐκκλησίᾳ πόλεμον εἰς THY ATTLKNY εἰσάγεις, 
Αἰσχίνη, πόλεμον ᾿Αμφικτνυονικόν, ob μὲν ἐκ παρα- 
΄ ΄, 3 » , ε S 24 ’ 
κλήσεως συγκαθήμενοι οὐκ εἴων με λέγειν, οὐ ὃ € αὐμαζον 


$142. 2. τὸ ΣΡ Li, ére καὶ vulg. 
ἑαυτῷ (for αὐτῷ) A I. Rs 
ὑποληφθῇ vulg.; ὑπολειφθῇ V6. 


γεγενημένος Al. 2. 
after πόλεμον Az. 


διαμαρτυρουμένου O. 


3. μνημονεύσοντας Σ, Φ; -evovras L. 


ὑποληφθῇ οὗτος ἐλάττων Σ, L; οὗτος ἐλάττων 


8 148. 2. ᾿᾽Ἔλατιαν (ι ch. to et) 2. ὁ Φίλ. 42. & ὧν O. 3. τὰ Βλλήνων 
πράγματα Ατ; τὰ τῶν 'Ἕλλ. ἀνέτρέψε L. ἐστιν (after οὗτος) om. L. 4. κατα- 
σκευάσας Al. τῶν μεγίστων vulg.; τῶν om. =, L, B, F, ®. 5. κακῶν 


6. dyes B, Το εἰσάγεις 


σφόδρώς; (aor.) is why did 7 express myself 
with all this vehement earnestness ? (relat- 
ing to the whole passage from § 140). 

2. ἐν τῷ δημοσίῳ, 771 the public record- 
office: this was in the Μητρῷον (see Aesch. 
111.187, Paus. I. 3, 5)- 

4. μὴ.. ἐλάττων, 1.6. lest Aesch. may 
be thought too small a man to work so 
great mischief. 

ν; 5. ὅπερ πρότερον συνέβη : this allusion 
i to a former time when Aesch. caused the 
ruin of the Phocians by bringing home 
false reports, can refer only to the return 
of the second embassy in 346 B.C. (see 
88. 32—36). This distinct statement that 
Aesch. was then thought ‘too insignifi- 
cant to do so much harm,” with the 
apprehension that the court may make 
the same mistake again in the present 
case, is one of the strongest confirmations 
of the opinion that the case against 
Aeschines really came to trial, that the 
speeches de Falsa Legatione were actually 
spoken, and that Aeschines was acquitted 


by a small majority. (See Essay Iv.) 

§ 143. 1. τὸν ἐν ᾿Αμφίσσῃ πόλε- 
pov: for this and the seizure of Elatea, 
see ὃ 1527 and note. The words τὸν... 
Ἐλάτειαν form a dactylic hexameter, 
followed by part of another; but see 
Blass’s note. 

2. ἡἠρέθη ἡγεμὼν ὃς, a man was chosen 
leader, who etc. (i.e. Philip): so West. 
Bl. brackets καὶ δι᾽ ὃν ἡρέθη. 

6. ἐν τῇ ἐκκλησίᾳ, 1.6. in the meeting 
in which Aesch. made his report of his 
doings in the Amphictyonic Council 
(Hist. § 74).—els τὴν ᾿Αττικὴν : Demosth. 
saw at once the full meaning of the Am- 
phictyonic war, and knew that it must 
end in bringing Philip into Greece as 
the Amphictyonic general (see note on 
§ 139°). 

7. οἱ... συγκαθήμενοι, those who sat 
together by his summons, i.e. his wapd- 
κλητοι, with whom he had packed the 
meeting. 

8. οὐκ εἴων pe λέγειν, i.e. would not 


ἦν ἐν τῷ Φιλίππῳ θεάσεσθε. 


- 


6. ἡ (for iy) εν 
8145. 1. ἡμᾶς At. 


_ let me go on speaking (after my warning). 
 --'οὶ δ᾽ ἐθαύμαζον : the ordinary citizens 
_ were amazed at anyone who dared to 
object to the pious and (apparently) 
_ patriotic speech of Aeschines. The de- 
_ cree of Demosthenes forbidding Athens 
to take any part in the future action of the 
Amphictyonic Council against Amphissa 
(Aesch. 125—127) was passed at a later 
_ Meeting, after the people had opened 
_ their eyes. 

ὃ 144. 2. εἵνεκα: see note on 


᾿ς 4. ὑπακούσατε: most edd. reject this 
reading of the best mss. for the vulg. 
ἀκούσατε or Rauchenstein’s ἐπακούσατε, 


εὖ πρᾶγμα συντεθὲν, that the plan 

‘was well concocted. 

5. πρὸς ἱστορίαν, for gaining a know- 

ledge. The real history of these events 

‘must be disentangled from the long story 
f Aeschines (106—131), supplemented 


ΠΕΡΙ TOY ZTEbANOY 


Ἄ Ν a οὗ ὃ Ν Ν ἰδί » θ 3 - > ε 
καὶ κενὴν αἰτίαν διὰ τὴν ἰδίαν ἔχθραν ἐπάγειν μ᾽ ὑπε- 
λάμβανον αὐτῷ. ἥτις δ᾽ ἡ φύσις, ἄνδρες ᾿Αθηναῖοι, γέγονεν 144 
τούτων τῶν πραγμάτων, καὶ τίνος εἵνεκα ταῦτα συνεσκευ- 
άσθη καὶ πῶς ἐπράχθη, νῦν ὑπακούσατε, ἐπειδὴ TOT ἐκω- 
λύθητε- καὶ γὰρ εὖ πρᾶγμα συντεθὲν ὄψεσθε, καὶ μεγάλ᾽ 
> td Ν ε / OA \ 4 / 
ὠφελήσεσθε πρὸς ἱστορίαν τῶν κοινῶν, Kal ὅση δεινότης 5 


Οὐκ ἦν τοῦ πρὸς ὑμᾶς πολέμου πέρας οὐδ᾽ ἀπαλλαγὴ 145 
6 Φιλίππῳ, εἰ μὴ Θηβαίους καὶ Θετταλοὺς ἐχθροὺς ποιήσειε 


9. καινὴν L. πεν om. Σῆς 
: 8 144. 1. ἄνδρες =, L, At, O; ὦ ἀνδρ. vulg. 2. εἵνεκα Σ, B (cf. §§ 1207, 
=: 175°) ὑπακούσατε Σ, L, B, Φ; ἀκούσατε At. 2, vulg. 4. yap om. Y. 


θεάσεσθε L, O; θεάσασθε Σ, vulg. Vom. 


and often corrected by the briefer account 
of Demosthenes (145—159). See Hist. 
§$ 7o—75. Fox analyzes the argument 
of Demosthenes skilfully in pp. 151—156, 
pointing out that it has all the merits 
which the ancient rules demand of a good 
narration (διήγησι5) : it is brief (σύντομος), 
perspicuous (σαφηνής), vivid (évapy7s), 
ethical (ἠθική), i.e. showing the moral pur- 
pose (mpoaipeois) of the actors (Aristot. 
Rhet. 111. 16, 8), and credible (πιθανή). 

§ 145. τ. οὐκ ἥν... εἰ μὴ ποιήσειε: 
see M.T. 696 and the examples. The 
protasis depends on an apodosis implied 
in οὐκ ἦν... Φιλίππῳ, the real meaning 
being Philip felt that he could not end or 
escape the war unless he should make the 
Th. hosttle to our city. This involves 
indirect discourse; and we might there- 
fore have had ἐὰν μὴ ποιήσῃ here for εἰ 
μὴ ποιήσειε. See Thuc. VII. 59, τἄλλα, 
ἣν ἔτι ναυμαχεῖν οἱ ᾿Αθηναῖοι τολμήσωσι, 
παρεσκευάζοντο, where the condition really 
depends on the idea ¢o be ready implied in 
παρεσκευάζοντο, and εἰ... τολμήσαιεν might 
have been used. Compare Thuc. VI. too, 
πρὸς τὴν πόλιν, εἰ ἐπιβοηθοῖεν, ἐχώρουν, 
they marched towards the city, in case they 
(the citizens) should rush out, i.e. to meet 
them in that case; the thought being ἢν 
ἐπιβοηθῶσιν. 


107 


108 AHMOZOENOY2 


τῇ πόλει: ἀλλὰ καίπερ ἀθλίως Kal κακῶς τῶν στρατηγῶν 
τῶν ὑμετέρων πολεμούντων αὐτῷ, ὅμως ὑπ᾽ αὐτοῦ τοῦ 

ς πολέμου καὶ τῶν λῃστῶν μυρί᾽ ἔπασχε κακά. οὔτε γὰρ 
ἐξήγετο τῶν ἐκ τῆς χώρας γιγνομένων οὐδὲν οὔτ᾽ εἰσήγετο 
146 ὧν ἐδεῖτ᾽ αὐτῷ: ἢν δ᾽ οὔτ᾽ ἐν τῇ θαλάττῃ τότε κρείττων 
ὑμῶν, οὔτ᾽ εἰς τὴν ᾿Αττικὴν ἐλθεῖν δυνατὸς μήτε Θετταλῶν 

> , Fire ΄ ΄ , 7 5:5. Ἑ 
ἀκολουθούντων μήτε. Θηβαίων διιέντων: συνέβαινε δ᾽, αὐτῷ 

τῷ πολέμῳ κρατοῦντι τοὺς ὁποιουσδήποθ᾽ ὑμεῖς ἐξεπέμπετε 

ς στρατηγοὺς (ἐῶ γὰρ τοῦτό γε) αὐτῇ τῇ φύσει τοῦ τόπου καὶ 


5. χρηστῶν (for λῃστῶν) V6. 6. ἐσήγετο Σ. 
8146. 1. τότε κρείττων =, L, At; Kp. τότε vulg.; τότε Om. A2. 2. ἐλθεῖν 
om. Y. 3. Te (for dé) At. 


3. ἀθλίως... .πολεμούντων : Chares and 
Phocion were the Athenian commanders 
at the beginning of the war, while Philip 
was besieging Byzantium. Chares was 
much censured for inefficiency: for the 
conflicting opinions concerning his mili- 
tary operations, see Hist. § 67, note 6. 
For Phocion’s generalship there is only 
praise. But the operations here men- 
tioned are probably those of the later 
part of 340—339, when Philip was in 
Scythia (Hist. ὃ 70), of which we have 
little information. 

4. ὑπ᾽ αὐτοῦ τοῦ πολέμου, i.e. dy the 
mere state of war, as explained in lines 
a fe ; 

5. λῃστῶν: a state of war naturally 
encouraged pirates and plunderers. 

6. τῶν ἐκ τῆς χώρας γιγνομένων : the 
common πρόληψις for τῶν ἐν τῇ χώρᾳ 
γιγν., caused by ἐξήγετο. See S$ 44°, 
215}: 

7. αὐτῷ, with εἰσήγετο. 

8 146. 2. μήτε.. διιέντων, ie. εἰ μήτε 
Θετταλοὶ ἀκολουθοῖεν μήτε Θηβαῖοι διιεῖεν : 
Philip depended on Thessalian troops to 
fill his army, but he would have been 
satisfied with Thebes (under the circum- 
stances) ifshe had merely made no objection 
to his marching through Boeotia to attack 
Athens. There was probably a coolness 
already between Thebes and Philip, 
which appears later when Thebes refused 
to attend the Amphictyonic meeting in 


the autumn of 339 B.c. (See Aesch. III. 
128.) See Hist. § 70, for the relations of 
Philip to Thessaly and Thebes. 

4. ὁποιουσδήποθ᾽ : here relative, while 
generally relative forms with οὖν and 67- 
more are indefinite. See τοὺς ὁποιουσ- 
τινασοῦν in VIII. 20, and ὅτου δήποτε 
ἕνεκα in § 218 (above). See Kriiger, 
§ 50, 8, 16, for the article prefixed to 
‘‘relative clauses used adjectively,” as 
here; cf. XIX. 254, τοὺς οἷος οὗτος ἀνθρώ- 
TOUS. 

6. τῶν ὑπαρχόντων ἑκατέροις, of the 
relative resources of each, i.e. of his own 
inferiority in resources, especially in naval 
power. For a similar use of this vague 
expression in a definite sense, see Thuc. 
1. 1418, where Pericles speaks of the 
comparative resources of Athens and her 
enemies: τὰ δὲ τοῦ πολέμου καὶ τῶν 
ἑκατέροις ὑπαρχόντων ὡς οὐκ ἀσθενέστερα 
ἕξομεν. 

8 147. This is closely connected in 


thought with the beginning of ὃ 145. 


How, thought Philip, can I induce the 
Thessalians and Thebans to join me? 
He remembered their zeal in the Phocian 
war: see XIX. 50, τοῖς ᾿Αμφικτύοσι"... 
ποίοις; οὐ yap ἦσαν αὐτόθι πλὴν Θηβαῖοι 


καὶ Θετταλοί. A new Sacred war, or ΔῆΥ 
war for the rights of the Amphictyonic — 


? 
; 


Council, would be sure to rouse their 
interest again. 


ΠΕΡῚ TOY ZTEPANOY 109 


TOV ὑπαρχόντων ἑκατέροις κακοπαθεῖν. εἰ μὲν οὖν τῆς 147 
ἰδίας ἕνεκ᾽ ἔχθρας ἢ τοὺς Θετταλοὺς ἢ τοὺς Θηβαίους 
(0 B dtl ἐφ᾽ ε ~ ἠδέ 9 ε “~ Saf 5 la 
συμπείθοι βαδίζειν ἐφ᾽ ὑμᾶς, οὐδέν᾽ ἡγεῖτο προσέξειν αὐτῷ 
\ lal 5Ν) a’ Ν 5 / \ ff ἊΝ 
τὸν νοῦν: ἐὰν δὲ τὰς ἐκείνων κοινὰς προφάσεις λαβὼν 
ἡγεμὼν αἵρεθῃ, ῥᾷον ἡλπιζεν τὰ μὲν παρακρούσεσθαι τὰ 5 
δὲ πείσειν. τί οὖν; ἐπιχειρεῖ, θεάσασθ᾽ ὡς εὖ, πόλεμον 
ἴων “ > , \ Ν ya ’ὔ , 
ποιῆσαι τοῖς Αμφικτύοσι καὶ περὶ τὴν Πυλαίαν ταραχὴν" 
3 Ν .- 19 > Ν . > \ ε , ε ἴω rs 
εἰς yap ταῦτ᾽ εὐθὺς αὐτοὺς ὑπελάμβανεν αὑτοῦ δεήσεσθαι. 


8 147. 5. συμπείθει Az. 
Β, A2; οὐδέν᾽ av V6; οὐδὲν ἂν vulg. 
αὐτῶι D; αὐτῷ L, vulg.; αὑτῷ Bk. 
over 7) 3; αἱρεθῇ (over pe0n) B. 
V6. 8. αὐτοὺς om. AI. 


ἤλπιζεν 
αὑτοῦ Bk.; αὐτοῦ Σ; αὐτοῦ L, vulg. 


οὐδένα (without dv) L, At; οὐδὲνὰν Σ᾽; οὐδένα ἂν 


ἡγεῖτο om. ΑἹ. προσέχειν Ατ. 
ἐὰν =, L; ἂν vulg. 5. ηρεθῆι (αι 
=, Vom., West., Bl. παρακρούσασθαι 


I. εἰ μὲν.. συμπείθοι, i.e. 27. he were 
to join in an attempt to persuade them etc.: 
συμ- implies that he would depend greatly 
on the influence of his friends in Thebes 
and Thessaly. 

3. οὐδέν᾽ ἡγεῖτο προσέξειν : I omit ἂν 
before ἡγεῖτο, with L, Αἱ, and most 
recent editors, because its insertion is 
accounted for by the v. 1. προσέχειν, 
with which it would be required, 
while προσέξειν ἄν would be a rare ex- 
pression. (See M.T. 197, 208.) The 
simple προσέξειν is also supported by the 
following παρακρούσεσθαι and πείσειν and 
by the infinitives in § 148. For the con- 
ditional forms in this section and the 
following, see note on ὃ 1487. 

4. ἐὰν... αἱρεθῇ, 1.6. 27. he should adopt 
(as his own) some grounds common to both 
Thebans and Thessalians, on which he 
might be chosen general. See τὰς ἰδίας 
προφάσεις, opposed to τὰς ᾿Αμφικτυονικὰς 
(the real κοινάς), in § 1581. The actual 
result of the scheme is seen in §§ 151, 152. 

5. τὰ pev...meloey, 1.6. to succeed 
sometimes by deception, sometimes by per- 
suaston. For the tense of the infinitive 
with ἐλπίζω, see M.T. 136. 

6. θεάσασθ᾽ ὡς εὖ, see how craftily: 
cf. ὃ 144°.—1mdXepov ποιῆσαι (not ποιή- 
σασθαι), to get upa war, i.e. to get the 
Amphictyons into a war. 

. 7. τὴν IIvAatav: the meeting of the 
Amphictyonic Council was so called, 


because twice in each year (in the spring 
and the autumn) the Council met first at 
Thermopylae in the sanctuary of Demeter 
Amphictyonis at Anthela, and afterwards 
proceeded to Delphi, where the regular 
sessions were held. See Hyper. Epitaph. 
§ 18, ἀφικνούμενοι yap δὶς τοῦ ἐνιαυτοῦ 
εἰς τὴν Πυλαίαν, θεωροὶ γενήσονται τῶν 
ἔργων x.7T-’., with Hdt. VII. 200, and 
Harpocr. under Ilva: Aesch. II. 126, 
πορεύεσθαι eis ἸΤύλας καὶ εἰς Δελφοὺς ἐν 
τοῖς τεταγμένοις χρόνοις, and Strab. p. 429 
(of Thermopylae), Δήμητρος ἱερὸν, ἐν ᾧ 
κατὰ πᾶσαν IIvAalavy θυσίαν ἐτέλουν οἱ 
᾿Αμφικτύονες. Records of meetings at 
Delphi in the spring as well as the 
autumn are found in inscriptions: see 
(.1. Att. 11. No. 551, ἐν Δελφοῖς, πυλαίας 
ἐαρινᾶς, and Dittenberger, Syll. Inscr. Gr., 
No. 185}, ἐπὶ Στράτωνος, ἐν Δελφοῖς, πυ- 
λαίας ὀπωρινῆς. See Essay v. 

8. εἰς ταῦτ᾽... δεήσεσθαι, world need 
him for these, especially for the war, as 
the only available commander. 

§ 148. Having made up his mind 
(1) that he must have the support of 
Thebes and Thessaly (§§ 145, 146), and 
(2) that he can secure this only by an 
Amphictyonic war (§ 147), he now (3) 
determines to find some Athenian to in- 
stigate the war, to disarm all suspicion 
in advance. For this important work he 
hires Aeschines (§ 148). 


ae ee ee ee 


ee a eee ee eS 3). - 


aaa Ss: = - °° °° @©@€@€~ 


ΤῸ ΔΗΛΛΟΣΘΕΝΟΥΣ 


ἴω x la eg 4 “ la ε 
148 εἰ μὲν τοίνυν τοῦτο ἢ τῶν παρ ἐαυτου πεμπομένων τερομνη- 


7 my A 3 ΄ ,ὔ > rea: 2 ε , 6 XV 
μόνων ἢ τῶν ἐκείνου συμμάχων ELONYOLTO TLS, ὑπόψεσθαι τὸ 
la) wp | / Ν Ν / δὶ \ Θ λ Ν ἈΝ 
πραγμ ἐνόμιζε καὶ τοὺς Θηβαίους καὶ Tous Θετταλοὺς Kat 


πάντας φυλάξεσθαι, ἂν δ᾽ ᾿Αθηναῖος ἢ καὶ παρ᾽ ὑμῶν TOV 


i δι y ΄ 
ς ὑπεναντίων ὁ τοῦτο ποιῶν, εὐπόρως λήσειν: ὁπερ συνέβη. 
149 πῶς οὖν ταῦτ᾽ ἐποίησεν; μισθοῦται τουτονί. οὐδενὸς δὲ 
> A 3 ΄ 9 
προειδότος, οἶμαι, TO πρᾶγμ οὐδὲ φυλάττοντος, ὠσπερ 
x \ A ἈΝ ty: ΄ θ Naber ve 
εἴωθε τὰ τοιαῦτα παρ᾽ ὑμῖν γίγνεσθαι, προβληθεὶς πυλα- 


§$ 148. I. 
avrou L. 2. 


4. ἅπαντας At, B, Y. 
κόλως A2. 
8 149. τ. μηδενὸς (om. δὲ) A2. 


πυλαγορος Σ᾽; πυλαγορας = (corr-), L, vulg. 


1. ἱερομνημόνων : these were the 
regular members of the Amphictyonic 
Council, two from each of the twelve 
tribes. Other delegates, called πυλάγοροι, 
who had the right to speak in the Council 
but had no votes, were chosen by the 
several states belonging to these tribes. 
Thus Athens in the spring of 339 B.C. 
sent her one Hieromnemon and three 
Pylagori. See Hist. § 72, and Essay v. 

2. ἐκείνου, Ais, from the orator’s point 
of view, just after ἑαυτοῦ, λὲς own, from 
Philip’s: cf. Xen. Mem. Iv. 7, 1, Τὴν 
ἑαυτοῦ γνώμην ἀπεφαίνετο πρὸς τοὺς ὁμι- 
λοῦντας αὐτῷ. 

3. τοὺς... Θετταλοὺς : subj. οἵ ὑπό- 
ψεσθαι. 

4. ἀν δ᾽ ᾿Αθηναῖος ἧ: we have the 
same antithesis here between ἂν... ἢ and 
the preceding εἰ... εἰσηγοῖτο which we had 
in § 147 between ἐὰν,., αἱρεθῇ (4) and εἰ 
συμπείθοι (1). It is commonly assumed 
that ἐάν with the subjunctive expresses 
greater probability or likelihood that the 
supposition may prove true than εἰ with 
the optative; and this double antithesis 
is often cited as a strong confirmation of 
this view: It seems to be overlooked 
that all four suppositions are in ovatzo 
obligua after past tenses, and (if we read 
προσέξειν without ἄν in § 147%) would all 
be expressed in the oratio recta (i.e. as 
Philip conceived them) by subjunctives, 
ἐὰν συμπείθω, αἱρεθῶ, εἰσηγῆται, ᾿Αθηναῖος 


τοῦτο Σ, L, At, O; τοῦτον B, vulg. 
εἰσηγοῖτο Ai, F (corr.), Y, most ed. ; εἰσηγεῖτο =, L, vulg., Vom. 
φυλάξεσθαι Σ, L, A2, F, O; φυλάξασθαι At, Ὥς 5. εὖ. 


3. map ὑμῶν O, F. 
(see Vomel’s prolegomena, p. Xvi.). 


ἑαυτοῦ Σ, vulg.; αὑτοῦ B; 


προβληθεὶς δὲ Α.2. 


ἢ, which would all be retained if the 
leading verb were present or future. If 
then these forms now show any inherent 
distinction between subj. and opt. 85. 
regards probability, this has been intro- 
duced by the oratio obliqua after a past 
tense. I have long maintained that in — 
such antitheses the subjunctive is a more 
distinct and vivid form than the optative, 
and is therefore chosen to express the 
supposition which was uppermost in the 
mind of the one who made it. Here 
the two subjunctives express the plans 
which Philip had most at heart, and the 
two optatives express the opposite alter- 
natives. If his plans had failed, we 
cannot suppose that the moods would | 
have been interchanged. We have a 
somewhat similar case below in § 1767, 
where the more vivid εἰ προαιρησόμεθ᾽ 
expresses the supposition against which 
the speaker is especially eager to warn 
his hearers, but which proved to be false, 
while the weaker ἐὰν πεισθῆτ᾽ ἐμοί is 
made less emphatic, though it refers to’ 
what is desired and what actually oc- 
curred. See M.T. 447, 690; and note 
on § 176! (below). I have nothing to 
change in the views of these passages 
expressed in the Trans. of the Am. 
Philol. Assoc. for 1873, pp. 71, 72, and 
the Engl. Journ. of Philol. vol. v. No. 10, 
p- 198. 4 
8 149. 3. προβληθεὶς, nominated: 


NEP! TOY STEPANOY III 


γορος οὗτος Kal τριῶν ἢ τεττάρων χειροτονησάντων αὐτὸν 
3 4 ε Ν Ν “ / 5 / Ἂς 3 ’ὔ 3 
ἀνερρήθη. ὡς δὲ τὸ τῆς πόλεως ἀξίωμα λαβὼν ἀφίκετ 
3 Ν b Lava , ’ + > > Ν \ Ν 
εἰς τοὺς ᾿Αμφικτύονας, πάντα Tadd’ ἀφεὶς καὶ παριδὼν 
4“. ἀν 249 3 3 , δ /, > , Ν 
ἐπέραινεν ἐφ᾽ οἷς ἐμισθώθη, καὶ λόγους εὐπροσώπους καὶ 
΄ ψΨ ¢ 7 , ΠΑΝ \ \ 
μύθους, ὅθεν ἡ Kippaia χώρα καθιερώθη, συνθεὶς Kat 
Ἂ > P 9 / / Ν Ἂς / > 
διεξελθὼν ἀνθρώπους ἀπείρους λόγων καὶ TO μέλλον οὐ 
προορωμένους, τοὺς ἱερομνήμονας, πείθει ψηφίσασθαι περι- 
ελθεῖν τὴν χώραν ἣν οἱ μὲν ᾿Αμφισσεῖς σφῶν αὐτῶν οὖσαν 
γεωργεῖν ἔφασαν, οὗτος δὲ τῆς ἱερᾶς χώρας ῃτιᾶτ᾽ εἶναι, 
lal la A a la) 

οὐδεμίαν δίκην τῶν Λοκρῶν ἐπαγόντων ἡμῖν, οὐδ᾽ ἃ νῦν 


“cf. 


9. ἀπείρους λόγους V6. 
8 150. 2. αὑτῶν V6. che 


the πυλάγοροι were chosen by hand vote 
(χειροτονησάντων), while the ἱερομνήμων, 
the higher officer, was chosen annually 
by lot (λαχών, Ar. ΝΡ. 623). 

4. Tplov ἢ τεττάρων : this small vote 
shows how little the Assembly understood 
the importance of the election. 

5. ἀξίωμα, prestige, dignity (of a dele- 
gate of Athens). 

6. εἰς τοὺς ᾿Αμφικτύονας : this was 
the meeting in the spring of 339 B.c., 
described by Aeschines (III. 115—124). 

7. εὐπροσώπους, plausible ( fairfaced ; 
barefaced). 

8. μύθους, /a/es, referring to the elo- 
quent account of the first Sacred war in 
the time of Solon (Aesch. III. 107—112). 
--ὖθεν...καθιερώθη, from the time when 


the plain of Cirrha was consecrated: cf. 


_ Aesch. 111. 61, λέξω ὅθεν μάλιστα παρα- 


παν. 


κολουθήσετε. We see by this passage 
that Aeschines repeated te the Amphic- 
tyons his story of the consecration of 
the plain of Cirrha, with all the terrible 


_ curses which were imprecated against those 


who should cultivate the devoted land. 
The consecration was made at the end 


| of the first Sacred war, about 586 8.6. 


9. ἀπείρους λόγων : ‘‘to the com- 


paratively rude men at Delphi, the 


speech of a first-rate Athenian orator 
was a rarity.” (Grote.) The Amphic- 
tyonic Council was composed chiefly 


ὑμῖν A2. 


of representatives of obscure and un- 
cultivated states. It was, in fact, a mere 
relic of antiquity, which had outlived its 
right to exist; and in the time of Philip 
it was merely galvanized into an un- 
natural vitality, which proved fatal to 
Greece and helpful only to the invader. 
See Grote’s remarks at the beginning of 
Chap. 87. 

For the account of this Amphictyonic 
meeting see Hist. §§ 72, 73. 

§ 150. 1. περιελθεῖν τὴν χώραν: Zo 
make an inspection (περίοδος) of the land. 
An inscription of 380 B.c. records an 
order of the Amphictyons for official 
περίοδοι of the consecrated land, and a 
fine was to be imposed on any who 
should be found encroaching on it; 
failure to pay the fine was to be punished 
by exclusion from the temple and even 
by war. See Blass, and C. I. Att. 11. 
No. 545, 15—18. 

3. ἡτιᾶτ᾽, alleged (in his accusation). 

4. οὐδεμίαν... ἐπαγόντων : Aesch. (116) 
says the Amphissians zntended to propose 
a decree in the Council (εἰσέφερον δόγμα) 
fining Athens fifty talents for hanging 
up on the temple walls some old shields, 
relics of Plataea, with the restored inscrip- 
tion, ᾿Αθηναῖοι ἀπὸ Μήδων καὶ Θηβαίων 
ὅτε τἀναντία τοῖς Ελλησιν ἐμάχοντο. Re- 
newing this taunting inscription (which 
was natural and proper in 479 B.C.) after 


5 


150 


151 


ΤῸ ΔΗΛΛΟΣΘΕΝΟΥΣ 


οὗτος προφασίζεται λέγων οὐκ ἀληθῆ. γνώσεσθε δ᾽ 


> “ > + ates ¥ “ la / “ 
ἐκεῖθεν. οὐκ ἐνῆν ἄνευ τοῦ προσκαλέσασθαι δήπου τοῖς 
Λοκροῖς δίκην κατὰ τῆς πόλεως τελέσασθαι. τίς οὖν ἐκλή- 
“A / > A lal 
τευσεν ἡμᾶς; ἀπὸ ποίας ἀρχῆς; εἰπὲ τὸν εἰδότα, δεῖξον. 
ἀλλ᾽ οὐκ ἂν ἔχοις, ἀλλὰ κενῇ φά j a 
VK ἂν ἔχοις, κενῇ προφάσει ταύτῃ κατεχρὼ 
x “A / la 
καὶ ψευδεῖ. περιιόντων τοίνυν THY χώραν τῶν ᾿Αμφικτυόνων 
Ν \ \ 
κατὰ τὴν ὑφήγησιν τὴν τούτου, προσπεσόντες οἱ Λοκροὶ 
ἴω Ψ 
μικροῦ κατηκόντισαν ἅπαντας, τινὰς δὲ καὶ συνήρπασαν 
la 9 ‘ 
τῶν ἱερομνημόνων. ὡς δ᾽ ἅπαξ ἐκ τούτων ἐγκλήματα Kal 
7 3 “~ ~ 
πόλεμος πρὸς τοὺς ᾿Αμφισσεῖς ἐταράχθη, τὸ μὲν πρῶτον 


5. οὗτος mpop. λέγων Σ, L, Az; προφ. οὗτ. λέγ. Ar; οὗτ. λέγ. προῴ. B, vulg. ; 


οὗτος om. Y. γνώσεσθαι Σ. 6. 


amd >, L, B, vulg.; ἐπὶ Ar. 2, O (mg.). 


προκαλέσασθαι Ar, F, O, B (προσ over προ). 
7. τελέσασθαι Σ, L, Ar; συντελ. B, vulg. 


8. Huds Z, L, At. 2, B, O; duds vulg. 
9. καινῇ mpop. Σ, At. 


8 151. 2. εὐφήγησιν (ev corr. to v) Σ. 3. μικροῦ Σ, L; μικροῦ μὲν vulg. 
κατηκόντισαν ἅπαντας L, Ar, = (corr.); ἅπαντ. κατηκ. vulg. 5. ᾿Αμφισσῆς 
V6. ἐτάχθη At. 


the lapse of 140 years was, to say the 
least, not a friendly act, and it shows the 
bitter enmity against Thebes which was 
still felt by Athens. Demosthenes does 
not seem to understand by δίκην ἐπα- 
γόντων what Aeschines means by εἰσέ- 
gepov δόγμα. An intention to introduce 
a decree would not need ἃ previous 
summons, which δίκην ἐπάγειν, and still 
more δίκην τελέσασθαι, to make a suit 
ready for trial, would require. It is 
most likely that the cautious language 
of Aeschines which now stands in his 
speech (116) is not what he actually used 
in court. And the further remark of 
Demosthenes, οὐδ᾽ ἃ viv οὗτος mpopact- 
ζεται, seems to imply that Aeschines had 
told a different story about the intentions 
of the Amphissians when he made his 
report of the meeting at Delphi (125) 
from that which he told in court. It is 
therefore difficult to judge the argument 
of Demosthenes about the want of a legal 
summons. Certainly no summons was 


thought necessary when the Council a 
few hours later voted to make a raid 
upon the new buildings of the Amphis- 
sians at Cirrha; but here there was no 
pretence of any judicial proceeding, but 


only a περίοδος of the sacred land (§§ 150", 
1511), which became a mob. 

8. ἀπὸ ποίας ἀρχῆς; from what 
authority did the summons come? West. 
quotes with approval Weil’s interpreta- 
tion of ἐπὶ ποίας ἀρχῆς; ‘devant quelle 
autorité athénienne la citation fut-elle 
notifiée ?”? Witnesses to a summons were 
required at Athens when the defendant 
was in Attica. These were called κλη- 
τῆρες, which same name was given to the 
officers of the law who served a summons 
on persons outside of Attica: see Ar. Av. 
147, 1422. ἐκλήτευσεν (7) refers to the 
act of such an Amphictyonic κλητήρ.--- 
δεῖξον : cf. δεῖξον, XXIX. 41. The comma 
must follow εἰδότα. 

9. GAN οὐκ ἂν ἔχοις : so ὃ 76°. 

8 151. 1. περιιόντων : cf. περιελθεῖν, 
8 τροῖ. See Aesch. 122, 123: 

3. μικροῦ (M.T. 779%), almost, be- 
longs to κατηκόντισαν: cf. Aesch. 123, 
εἰ μὴ ἐξεφύγομεν, ἐκινδυνεύσαμεν ἀπο- 
λέσθαι. 

4. ἐγκλήματα.... ἐταράχθη: we have 
πόλεμον ταράσσειν, like proelia miscere Or 
confundere, Plat. Rep. 567 A, and ἐγκλή- 
ματα ταράξειν, Plut. Them. 5 (ΒΙ.). 


ΠΕΡΙ 


ΤΟῪ ΣΤΕΦΑΝΟῪ 


113 


ε ͵ὕ 9 κ᾿ A > , »ν , ε 
ὁ Κόττυφος αὐτῶν τῶν ᾿Αμφικτυόνων ἤγαγε στρατιάν: ὡς 


δ᾽ οἱ μὲν οὐκ ἦλθον, οἱ δ᾽ ἐλθόντες οὐδὲν ἐποίουν, εἰς τὴν 
> “ : ΄ 5νΝ Ν / : > ε δ δου Tey 
ἐπιοῦσαν Πυλαίαν ἐπὶ τὸν Φίλιππον εὐθὺς ἡγεμόν᾽ ἦγον 


ε / δ nA Ν lal lal 
Ol κατεσκευασμένοι καὶ πάλαι πονηροὶ τῶν Θετταλῶν Kal 


τῶν 


ἐν ταῖς ἄλλαις πόλεσι. 


οἷ , 5 , 
καὶ προφάσεις εὐλόγους 


> , x 
εἰλήφεσαν" Ἶ γὰρ αὐτοὺς εἰσφέρειν Kat ξένους ὙΠ ες Ἐν 
Be ἔφασαν δεῖν καὶ ζημιοῦν τοὺς μὴ ταῦτα ποιοῦντας, ἣ ᾽κεῖνον 


epee Ca 


ἡγεμών. 


τί δεῖ τὰ πολλὰ λέγειν; npeOn yap ἐκ τούτων 
καὶ μετὰ ταῦτ᾽ εὐθέως δύναμιν συλλέξας καὶ 
ἕ παρελθὼν ὡς ἐπὶ τὴν Κιρραίαν, ἐρρῶσθαι φράσας πολλὰ 


‘a 
᾿ς Κιρραίοις καὶ Λοκροῖς, τὴν ᾿Ελάτειαν καταλαμβάνει. εἰ 

ἥ- 7. οἱ δ᾽ ἐλθόντες om. 2} (add. mg.), 1. (add. mg.). 9. κατασκευασάμενοι V6. 
— £§ 152. 5. εὐθέως Σ,1,, At. 2; εὐθὺς vulg.; εὐθέως ὁ Φίλιππος At. 2. 6. κιρ- 
pay Σ, L}; κιρραίαν 1; κεῤῥαίαν Νό. epp@obe =. πολλὰ φράσας At. Hae eK 
Ε΄ Keppators vulg.; καὶ om. 2, L, Ar. 2 ἐπὶ τὴν Ol. 


the president of the 
Pharsalus 


= 6. Kérrvudos: 
͵ Council, a Thessalian of 
(Aesch. 128). 
7. οὐκ ἦλθον: e.g. Thebans and 

Athenians, and doubtless others.—ovdév 
ἐποίουν : see Aesch. 129.—els τὴν ém- 
οὖσαν... ἦγον (sc. τὰ πράγματα), took 
measures at once, against the coming 
_ meeting (autumn of 339), fo put things 
(i.e. the war) zmto the hands of Philip as 
commander, See ΙΧ. 57, οἱ μὲν ἐφ᾽ ἡμᾶς 
τ νον τὰ πράγματα, οἱ δ᾽ ἐπὶ Φίλιππον. 
9. οἱ κατεσκευασμένοι (pass.), those 
a 

with whom arrangements had been made. 
. ᾿ς πάλαι πονηροὶ: ef. § 1587, ὑπὸ πολλῶν 
kal πονηρῶν. * 
Demosthenes distinctly implies that 
Cottyphus was made general at the 
spring meeting, but that, after a mere 
pretence of war, intrigues at once began 
for superseding him by Philip at the 
autumnal meeting (εἰς τὴν ἐπιοῦσαν IIv- 
he av). Aeschines, on the contrary, 
whose whole object is to show that a 
“real Amphictyonic war was intended, 
with no help or thought of help from 
‘Philip, and to represent Philip’s final 
ap pointment as commander as a remote 
afterthought, states that no action was 
taken against the Amphissians in the 
ring, but that a special meeting was 


GD. 


called before the regular autumnal Πυ- 
λαία, to take such action (124). At 
this special meeting, which Athens and 
Thebes refused to attend (Aesch. 126 
—128), Cottyphus was chosen general 
(according to Aesch.), while Philip was 
‘“‘away off in Scythia’; and after a 
successful campaign the Amphissians 
were fined and their offending citizens 
were banished. But they refused to 


submit; and finally, ‘‘a long time after- 
wards” (πολλῴ χρόνῳ ὕστερον), a second 
expedition became necessary “after 


Philip’s return from his Scythian expe- 
dition”’:—he does not even then say 
that Philip was actually made general! 
See Hist. §§ 74—76. 

§ 152. 2. αὐτοὺς εἰσφέρειν... δεῖν, 
they must themselves (ipsos) pay taxes, 
etc. 

3. ἢ κεῖνον αἱρεῖσθαι: this alter- 
native was one of the προφάσεις εὔλογοι 
(§ 151'°) for choosing Philip. 

6. παρελθὼν (sc. εἴσω Πυλῶν): cf. 
§ 35°.—éppacbar φράσας πολλὰ, bidding 
many farewells (a long adieu): so XIX. 
248. Cf. &ppwoo, vale. 

7. °EXdreav: when Philip had passed 
Thermopylae, he hardly made a pretence 
of entering into the war with Amphissa, 
for which he was chosen commander; 


8 


152 


153 


114 ΔΗΛΛΟΣΘΕΝΟΥΣ 


> lal > ε “A 
μὲν οὖν μὴ μετέγνωσαν εὐθέως, ὡς τοῦτ᾽ εἶδον, οἱ Θηβαῖοι 
an x Ψ A 
καὶ μεθ᾽ ἡμῶν ἐγένοντο, ὥσπερ χειμάρρους ἄν ἅπαν τοῦτο 
\ “A > Ν / 3 / al \ / ιν / 
τὸ πρᾶγμα εἰς THY πόλιν εἰσέπεσε: νῦν δὲ TO Y ἐξαίφνης 
ὅπ »Χ > καὶ ay \ > » ὃ aN) aA 
5 ἐπέσχον αὐτὸν ἐκεῖνοι, μάλιστα MEV, ὦ ανὸρες ηναῖοιυ, 
nA wn 5 ἅψας oF »" ὦ 5 
θεῶν τινὸς εὐνοίᾳ πρὸς ὑμᾶς, εἶτα μέντοι, καὶ ὅσον Kall ἐν 
+ Ἂς αν ἯῚ ᾽ὔ Ν / Ν / “A Ν ‘ 
ἄνδρα, καὶ Sv ἐμέ. δὸς δέ μοι τὰ δόγματα ταῦτα καὶ TOUS 
- yg ν a / / > 
χρόνους ἐν οἷς ἕκαστα πέπρακται, ἵν᾽ εἰδῆτε ἡλίκα πράγμαθ 
g » ‘4 
154 ἡ μιαρὰ κεφαλὴ ταράξασ᾽ αὕτη δίκην οὐκ ἔδωκεν. λέγε 


μοι τὰ δόγματα. 


8 153. 2. εὐθέως Σ, L, Ar; εὐθὺς B, vulg. 


ws τοῦτ᾽ εἶδον, οἱ Σ, L, Α΄. 2, Φ 


(yp); om. B, vulg. 3. καὶ (before μεθ᾽) om. ΑἹ. 4. Thy zd, L}, & F (corr: 
to τότ᾽; τότε A2, B, Y; τότε γ᾽ vulg.; τοῦτό γ᾽ Al. 5. αὐτὸν om. Ar, BI, @!. 
7. ταῦτα τὰ δόγματα A2. 9. mpdiaca L. 


8 154. 1. καί μοι λέγε Al. 


and soon appeared at the Phocian town 
of Elatea, which commanded the pass 
into Boeotia and ‘‘the road to Athens.” 
This move left no further doubt as to his 
real intentions. In. 344 B.c. there had 
been a report that Philip was about to 
seize and fortify Elatea, and thus threaten 
Thebes: see vI. 14. Aeschines says (140) 
of Philip’s sudden movement, τὸν πόλεμον 
ὃν πρότερον ἐξήλασεν ἐκ τῆς χώρας τῆς 
Βοιωτῶν (i.e. the Phocian war), τοῦτον 
πάλιν τὸν αὐτὸν πόλεμον (i.e. a similar 
sacred war) ἐπῆγε διὰ τῆς Φωκίδος ἐπ᾽ 
αὐτὰς τὰς Θήβας. As the spurious de- 
cree of Demosthenes. (88 181—187) no 
longer disturbs the chronology, we see 
that Philip must have been made general 
in the early autumn of 339 B.C., and 
probably seized EJatea in the late autumn 
or early winter; so that the campaign 
lasted about eight or nine months until 
the battle of Chaeronea in August or 
September 338. A ‘winter battle” is 
naturally mentioned in § 216% The 
startling effect of the news from Elatea 
at Athens is described in 88 16g ff. 

8 1583. 3. μεθ᾽ ὑμῶν ἐγένοντο, sozzed 
you.—domep χειμάρρους, dike a winter 
torrent : most of the rivers of Greece are 
nearly or quite dry the greater part of 
the year, and in the winter and spring 
are often filled by rushing torrents. 
Many of these, when dry, still serve as 


paths over the mountain passes. Similar 
simple comparisons are ὥσπερ νέφος, 
8 1885 (cf. νυκτὶ ἐοικώς, 1]. 1. 47); ὥσπεῤ 
πνεῦμα, ὃ 3089; ὥσπερ ἂν εἰ κατακλυσμόν, 
§ 2144; ὁ συμβὰς σκηπτός, ὃ 104΄. (See 
Bl.)—dtrav τοῦτο τὸ πρᾶγμα : we might 
say this whole thing, but with far less 
dignity. 

4. νῦν, as it was, in fact, opposed to 
εἰ μὴ μετέγνωσαν (2): cf. § 1339.---τό γ᾽ 
ἐξαίφνης, for the moment. 

6. εἶτα...δι᾽ ἐμέ, lit. det desedes, and 
so far as depended on any one man, also 
through me: the former καὶ connects 
ὅσον... ἄνδρα to εἶτα. Dindorf, Vomel, 
and Westermann understand μέντοι καὶ, 
ὅσον x.7.\.. making the first cai=adso, 
which the second καὶ merely repeats. 

7. ϑὸς: see note on § 285.---δόγματα 
ταῦτα are Amphictyonic decrees about 
the Amphissian affair.—tots χρόνους: 
we see from § 155} that this was an 
official statement from the records, show- 
ing that these decrees were passed when 
Aeschines was πυλάγορος. 

9. ἡ μιαρὰ κεφαλὴ : cf. XXI. 117, Kal 
ταῦτ᾽ ἔλεγεν ἡ μιαρὰ καὶ ἀναιδὴς αὕτη 
κεφαλὴ ἐξεληλυθὼς κιτ.λ., and XIX. 313. 
- ταράξασ᾽ : we should naturally express 
ταράξασα by the leading verb, and δίκην. 
οὐκ ἔδωκεν by without being punished. 
With πράγματα ταράξασα cf. ὃ 1515 and 
note. 


ΠΕΡΙ TOY ΣΤΕΦΑΝΟΥ 115 


AOTMA AM®@IKTYONON. 


[Emi ἱερέως Krewvayopou, ἐαρινῆς πυλαίας, ἔδοξε τοῖς πυλα- 
γόροις καὶ τοῖς συνέδροις τῶν ᾿Αμφικτυόνων καὶ τῷ κοινῷ τῶν 5 
᾿Αμφικτυόνων, ἐπειδὴ ᾿Αμφισσεῖς ἐπιβαίνουσιν ἐπὶ τὴν ἱερὰν 
χώραν καὶ σπείρουσι καὶ βοσκήμασι κατανέμουσιν, ἐπελθεῖν τοὺς 
πυλαγόρους καὶ τοὺς συνέδρους, καὶ στήλαις διαλαβεῖν τοὺς ὄρους, 
καὶ ἀπειπεῖν τοῖς ᾿Αμφισσεῦσι τοῦ λοιποῦ μὴ ἐπιβαίνειν. 


3 -—s&#BTEPON AOTMA. 


kf a ἃ A 

| [Emi ἱερέως KrXevvayopov, ἐαρινῆς πυλαίας, ἔδοξε τοῖς πυλα- 155 
FF A an An A “ 

279 γόροις καὶ τοῖς συνέδροις τῶν ᾿Αμφικτυόνων καὶ τῷ κοινῷ τῶν 

= ZA f 2 ὃ) re) A / \ ¢ \ ΄, 

μφικτυόνων, ἐπειδὴ οἱ ἐξ ᾿Αμφίσσης τὴν ἱερὰν χώραν κατανει- 

» ¥ “ “ 

μάμενοι γεωργοῦσι καὶ βοσκήματα νέμουσι, καὶ κωλυόμενοι τοῦτο 

ποιεῖν, ἐν τοῖς ὅπλοις παραγενόμενοι, τὸ κοινὸν τῶν “Ελλήνων 5 

: ‘ee ᾿ 

συνέδριον κεκωλύκασι μετὰ βίας, τινὰς δὲ καὶ τετραυματίκασι, τὸν 

ra \ τ , Aros , , Cre ΄, 

στρατηγὸν τὸν ἡρημένον τῶν Αμφικτυόνων Κόττυφον τὸν ᾿Αρκάδα 

A I δ a 

πρεσβεῦσαι πρὸς Φίλιππον τὸν Μακεδόνα, καὶ ἀξιοῦν iva βοηθήσῃ 
a > ΄ 4 \ oe Ὁ ἢ ’ isd \ f ἰῷ \ n 

τῷ Te ᾿Απόλλωνι Kai τοῖς ᾿Αμφικτύοσιν, ὅπως μὴ περιίδῃ ὑπὸ τῶν 

ἀσεβῶν ᾽Α é ὴν θεὸν Tr λού . καὶ διό ITO 

ἀσεβῶν ᾿Αμφισσέων τὸν θεὸν πλημμελούμενον" καὶ διότι αὐτὸν τὸ 

στρατηγὸν αὐτοκράτορα αἱροῦνται οἱ “EXAnves οἱ μετέχοντες τοῦ 

συνεδρίου τῶν ᾿Αμφικτυόνων.] 

ss M4 \ Ν Ν / 3 i ας ΛΕ ΣΌΝ c b ie 

Λέγε δὴ καὶ τοὺς χρόνους ἐν ois ταῦτ᾽ ἐγίγνετο. εἰσὶ 


τὸς ΕΥ̓͂. 4 ΑΕ ΄ “Ὁ i 
yap καθ᾽ ovs ἐπυλαγόρησεν οὗτος. λέγε. 


:. XPONOI. 


[Ἄρχων Μνησιθείδης, μηνὸς ἀνθεστηριῶνος ἕκτη ἐπὶ δέκα. 


[᾿ 
[ 


Ads δὴ τὴν ἐπιστολὴν ἣν, ὡς οὐχ ὑπήκουον οἵ Θηβαῖοι, 156 
πέμπει πρὸς τοὺς ἐν Πελοποννήσῳ συμμάχους ὁ Φίλιππος, 


5 $156. I. δή μοι vulg. ; μοι ΟΣ LAAT. ὑπήκου ον (-ον for -cav?) Σ. 
᾿ ta 80 O. 2. ὁ om. B. 


56. 1. οὐχ ὑπήκουον: this must 2. συμμάχους: i.e. the Arcadians, 
to a refusal of the Thebans, before Eleans, and Argives. See Isocr. v. 74, 
zure of Elatea, to join Philip ἢ ᾿ΑΔἀργεῖοι δὲ καὶ Μεσσήνιοι καὶ Μεγαλο- 
edition against the Amphissians. πολῖται καὶ τῶν ἄλλων πολλοὶ συμπολεμεῖν 
he entered Greece, he professed (sc. ὑπάρχουσί σοι ἕτοιμοι), and Dem. Ix. 
arching against them: see ὃ 152°, 27. See Hist. 88 51, 52. 

is ἐπὶ τὴν Kippalay. | 


S39 


116 AHMOSOENOY2 


ἵν᾽ εἰδῆτε καὶ ἐκ ταύτης σαφῶς ὅτι τὴν μὲν ἀληθῆ πρόφασιν 
τῶν πραγμάτων, τὸ ταῦτ᾽ ἐπὶ τὴν Ἑλλάδα καὶ τοὺς Θηβαίους 
ς καὶ ὑμᾶς πράττειν, ἀπεκρύπτετο, κοινὰ δὲ καὶ τοῖς ᾿Αμ- 
φικτύοσι δόξαντα ποιεῖν προσεποιεῖτο" ὃ δὲ τὰς ἀφορμὰς 
ταύτας καὶ τὰς προφάσεις αὐτῷ παρασχὼν οὗτος ἦν. λέγε. 


ἘΠΙΣΤΟΛΗ. 


157 [Βασιλεὺς Μακεδόνων Φίλιππος Ἰ]ελοποννησίων τῶν ἐν τῇ 
a Tal a a 7 
συμμαχίᾳ τοῖς δημιουργοῖς καὶ τοῖς συνέδροις καὶ τοῖς ἄλλοις 
συμμάχοις πᾶσι χαίρειν. ἐπειδὴ Λοκροὶ οἱ καλούμενοι ᾿Οζόλαι, 
a 2 3 / a 2 ὌΝ \ a?) / 
κατοικοῦντες ἐν ᾿Αμφίσσῃ, πλημμελοῦσιν εἰς TO ἱερὸν τοῦ ᾿Απόολ- 


5dwvos τοῦ ἐν Δελφοῖς καὶ τὴν ἱερὰν χώραν ἐρχόμενοι μεθ᾽ ὅπλων 


λεηλατοῦσι, βούλομαι τῷ θεῷ μεθ᾽ ὑμῶν βοηθεῖν καὶ ἀμύνασθαι 


a , ΕΝ , > ἊΨ “ εν a 
τοὺς παραβαίνοντάς τι τῶν ἐν ἀνθρώποις εὐσεβῶν" ὥστε TUVAVTATE 


μετὰ τῶν ὅπλων εἰς τὴν Φωκίδα, ἔχοντες ἐπισιτισμὸν ἡμερῶν. 
τεττωράκοντα, τοῦ ἐνεστῶτος μηνὸς λῴου, ὡς ἡμεῖς ἄγομεν, ὡς δὲ 

το ᾿Αθηναῖοι, βοηδρομιῶνος, ὡς δὲ Κορίνθιοι, πανήμου. τοῖς δὲ μὴ 
συναντήσασι πανδημεὶ χρησόμεθα [τοῖς δὲ συμβούλοις ἡμῖν. 
κειμένοις] ἐπιζημίοις. εὐτυχεῖτε.] 


158 Opal” ὅτι φεύγει τὰς ἰδίας προφάσεις, εἰς δὲ τὰς 
᾿Αμφικτυονικὰς καταφεύγει. τίς οὖν ὁ ταῦτα συμπαρα- 


,ὕ 9. A ΄ ε \ , , > , , Ὶ 
σκευάσας αὐτῷ; τίς ὁ τὰς προφάσεις ταύτας ἐνδούς; τίς 
¢ la la la , 3 » ae : ᾿ 
ὁ τῶν κακῶν τῶν γεγενημένων μάλιστ᾽ αἴτιος; οὐχ οὗτος; | 


5 μὴ τοίνυν λέγετε, ὦ ἄνδρες ᾿Αθηναῖοι, περιιόντες ὡς ὑφ᾽ 


δι ἡμᾶς Ο. τινὰ (for κοινὰ) Α2. 7. προφάσεις αὐτῷ παρασχὼν οὗτος 
ἦν L; mp. αὐτῷ παρασχὼν Σ᾽ (οὗτος ἣν αὐτῷ below the line), Φ (yp); πρ. παραδοὺς 
οὗτος ἦν αὐτῷ Al. 2; mp. παραδοὺς αὐτῷ οὗτος ἦν Β, vulg. ; 


§ 158. 1. μὲν after φεύγει vulg.; om. Σ,, 1.,.42.ὕ 2. παρασκευάσας AL; 
κατασκευάσας A2. 5. λέγετε om. Σ' (add. mg.). περιόντες ΟἹ. ἶ 
Προ κοινὰ ; cf. κοινὰς προφάσεις, 88 1474, 3. προφάσεις évSovs: cf. Thuc. I. 
1581. .- τοῖς ᾿Αμφικτύοσι δόξαντα, d4m- 87°, οὐκ ἐνδώσομεν πρόφασιν οὐδενὶ κακῷ. 
phictyonic decrees, ἃ τοῖς ᾿Αμῴ. ἔδοξεν. γενέσθαι. Ἷ 
Cf. Ill. 14, τὸ ποιεῖν ἐθέλειν τά. γε 5. μὴ λέγετε περιιόντες, do not go 


δόξαντα. The older Athenian decrees about and tell.—id’ ἑνὸς ἀνθρώπου, i.e 
began with ἔδοξε τῇ βουλῇ καὶ τῷ δήμῳ: by Philip: cf. εἷς ἀνήρ (of Philip), x1x. 

6. ὁ...παρασχὼν: cf. ὃ 1588, 64. Philip (he says) could never have 

8158. 2. ᾿Αμφικτυονικὰς: see §§147, accomplished his purpose, had he not 
156°.—katagevyet, takes refuge, opposed had such accomplices as Aeschines. No- 
to φεύγει (1), shuns: ‘spielende Parono- tice the effective collocation in ἡ ‘HAAG! 
masie.”” (BI.) ἀνθρώπου. (Bl.) a 


81 


i 


MEP! TOY ZTEPANOY 


117 
ἑνὸς τοιαῦτα πέπονθεν ἡ “Ἑλλὰς ἀνθρώπου. οὐχ ὑφ᾽ ἑνὸς, 
5 > ε Ἦν “ Ν ~ Aw 3 ε /, 4 5S “ 
ἀλλ᾽ ὑπὸ πολλῶν καὶ πονηρῶν τῶν παρ ἑκάστοις, ὦ γῆ 

4 / Σ Ὁ ε τῆς τ ΕΝ 3 \ > ΄ 3 \ 
Kat θεοί: ὧν εἷς οὑτοσὶ, ὃν, εἰ μηδὲν εὐλαβηθέντα τἀληθὲς 
εἰπεῖν δέοι, οὐκ ἂν ὀκνήσαιμ᾽ ἔγωγε κοινὸν ἀλιτήριον τῶν 
μετὰ ταῦτ᾽ ἀπολωλότων ἁπάντων εἰπεῖν, ἀνθρώπων, τόπων, 
πόλεων: ὁ γὰρ τὸ σπέρμα παρασχὼν, οὗτος τῶν φύντων 


an ¥ 
KQK@V QLTLOS. 


φητε θαυμάζω. 
ὑμῖν πρὸ τῆς ἀληθείας. 


a Y ey ae Or ἰδ ,ὔ > , 
OV OTWS TOT ,OQUK E€VUVUS LOOVTES απέεέστρα- 
Ν ΄ ,ὕ ε 3 9 Ν > 
πλὴν πολύ TL OKOTOS, WS EOLKEV, ἐστιν TOP 


> , , ἴω Ν “ (ὃ , 
υμβέβηκε τοίνυν μοι τῶν κατὰ τῆς πατρίδος τούτῳ 


᾽’ ε /, 3 ἃ ’ 5 / 2 FaN 
πεπραγμένων αψαμένῳ ELS α τούτοις ἐναντιούμενος αὑτὸς 


, 5 la ἃ la \ ν > x b | 7] 
πεπολίτευμαι ἀφῖχθαι: ἃ πολλῶν μὲν EVEK ἄν εἰκότως 


"τῶν om. >! (add. mg.). 
καὶ θεοὶ 2, vulg. 
§ 159. 1. 


οὑτοσὶ Σ, L) (ἐστιν add. 1,7); οὗτός ἐστιν vulg. εἰ 


ὦ γῆ καὶ ἄλλοι θεοὶ πάντες (99) late mg. Σ; ὦ γῆ 


om. V6. 


2. ἀλιτήριον (ι corr. from ἡ) 2; ἀλητήριον O! (φθορέα mg.); ἀλειτήριον West., Bl. 


4. οὗτος ἦν A2, O (mg.). 
tee 4) Bk., Dind.; Lips., Bl. 6. 
§ 160. τ. τότε (for τούτῳ) VO. 

évexa vulg. 


φύντων κακῶν 


> 
weal) 


vulg., Vom., West.; κακῶν om. L?, 


ἐστὶν before ws Y. 


ἀφῖχθαι = (corr.). 


8 159. 1. μηδὲν εὐλαβηθέντα, with- 
out reserve. 

2. κοινὸν ἀλιτήριον, a common curse 
and destroyer. An ἀλιτήριος is a man 


who has sinned against the Gods and is 


‘thereby under a curse, which curse he 
transmits to others with whom he has to 
do; also an avenging divinity: cf. Aen. 
‘Il. 573, Troiae et patriae communis 
Erinnys (of Helen). See Andocides 1. 


£30, 131: κλῃδὼν.. ὁτι Ἱππόνικος ἐν τῇ 
οἰκίᾳ ἀλιτήριον τρέφει, ὃς αὐτοῦ τὴν τράπε- 


fav ἀνατρέπει... οἰόμενος yap υἱὸν τρέφειν 
ἀλιτήριον αὑτῷ ἔτρεφεν, ὃς ἀνατέτροφεν 
ἐκείνου τὸν πλοῦτον, τὴν σωφροσύνην, τὸν 
ἄλλον βίον ἅπαντα. Demosthenes has 


_the word also in XIX. 226, τοῖς ἀλιτηρίοις 
τούτοις (of Aeschines and his party), and 
107, τῶν θεοῖς ἐχθρῶν, τῶν ἀλιτηρίων 


᾿Ολυνθίων. ᾿Αλάστωρ is similarly used in 
both senses: see below ὃ 2964, XIX. 305; 
see also Aeschyl. Eum. 236, δέχου δὲ 
πρευμενῶς ἀλάστορα (one who has already 
been purified); Pers. 354, φανεὶς ἀλάστωρ 
ἢ κακὸς δαίμων ποθέν. Aeschines twice 


(131, 137) calls Demosthenes τῆς ᾿Βλλάδος 
ἀλιτήριος (see Blass). 

4. τῶν φύντων κακῶν, of the harvest 
of woes: without κακῶν, which many 
omit, we should have the common saying 
about the harvest. Cic. Phil. If. 22. 55 
perhaps supports κακῶν: ut igitur in 
seminibus est causa arborum et stirpium, 
sic huius luctuosissimi belli semen tu 
fuisti. 

5. ὃν: object of both ἰδόντες and ἀπ- 
εστράφητε: the latter becomes transitive 
in the passive, like φοβέω, ἐκπλήσσω, etc. 

7. πρὸ τῆς ἀληθείας : 1.6. so as to 
conceal the truth from you. 


§§ 160-- 226. The orator now passes 
to his own agency in opposing the joint 
plot of Aeschines and Philip. See intro- 
ductory note on §§ 126—226. After 
speaking of the enmity between Athens 
and Thebes, which men like Aeschines 
had encouraged (§§ 160—163), he gives a 
graphic account of the panic excited at 
Athens by Philip’s seizure of Elatea, and 


ἕνεκ᾽ ἂν 2, L3 


159 


5 


160 


oe 
J 


ω 


Φὧ8δ88: =. ποσὰ "δ... i ἃ 


118 AHMOZOENOY> 


tae ae 


- 
- 


or 


ἀκούσαιτέ μου, μάλιστα δ᾽ ὅτι αἰσχρόν ἐστιν, ὦ ἄνδρες 

ς ᾿Αθηναῖοι, εἰ ἐγὼ μὲν τὰ ἔργα τῶν ὑπὲρ ὑμῶν πόνων 
161 ὑπέμεινα, ὑμεῖς δὲ μηδὲ τοὺς λόγους αὐτῶν ἀνέξεσθε. ὁρῶν 
γὰρ ἐγὼ Θηβαίους σχεδὸν δὲ καὶ ὑμᾶς ὑπὸ τῶν τὰ Φιλίππου 
φρονούντων καὶ διεφθαρμένων παρ᾽ ἑκατέροις, ὃ μὲν ἦν 
ἀμφοτέροις φοβερὸν καὶ φυλακῆς πολλῆς δεόμενον, τὸ τὸν 

5 Φίλιππον ἐᾶν αὐξάνεσθαι, παρορῶντας καὶ οὐδὲ καθ᾽ ἕν 
φυλαττομένους, εἰς ἔχθραν δὲ καὶ τὸ προσκρούειν ἀλλήλοις 


4. ἀκούσαιτε Y, ® (corr.); ἀκούσετε Σ, L, B, vulg.; ἀκούσατε Al. 2; ἀκούετε O. 


(See note below.) 5. ἡμῶν O. 

8 161. 2. ἡμᾶς O. 
A2, O (mg.), ® (yp); 
(for ἐᾶν) V6. 


of the manner in which he took advantage 
of this emergency to bring Athens and 
Thebes to a better understanding and 
even to an alliance against the common 
enemy (§§ 168—226). Into this account 
he introduces (§§ 189—210) a most elo- 
quent and earnest defence of the whole 
line of policy in opposition to Philip 
which Athens had followed chiefly by 
his advice. He pleads that Athens, with 
her glorious traditions, could have taken 
no other course, even if she had seen the 
fatal defeat at Chaeronea in advance. 
This is the most eloquent and impassioned 
passage in the oration; and it is addressed 
not merely to the court, but to the whole 
people and to future ages. 

8 160. 4. ἀκούσαιτε: this reading, 
though it has slight Ms. authority, is 
necessary here, with ἕνεκ᾽ dv in = and L, 
unless we admit ἀκούσετε dv. Σ often 
has ε for at or ac for e, from their identity 
in later pronunciation: see §§ 588, 69°, 
136°, 150°, 1528. 

5,6. τὰἀἔργα.. τοὺς λόγους: the actual 
labours, contrasted with merely listening 
to the account of them. Cf. λόγῳ and τὰ 
ἔργα; Thuc. I. 22. 

The orator introduces this continuation 
of his political history in an apologetic 
way, as in ἃ ττὸ he had left it doubtful 
whether he should speak at all of these 
later acts, τὰ pméyiora...... πεπραγμένων. 


τὰ τοῦ Φ. Νό. 
͵ 2 
πραττόντων L*, vulg. 


3. φρονούντων Σ, Li, Ar (corr. :); 
4. πολλ. φυλακ. V6. 5. ὁρᾶν 


This is a part of the skilful device by 
which he divides the long account of his 


public life, while at the same time he 


reminds the,court that the brilliant pas- 
sage which follows is over and above 
what is needed to defend Ctesiphon (see 


8 1261), and asks their attention toitasa 


personal favour to himself. 
§ 161. The orator recurs to the criti- 
cal moment in the relations of Athens 


and Thebes, when both were astounded — 


by the sudden seizure of Elatea, and the 
great question was whether Thebes should 


join Philip against Athens or athe ᾿ 


against the invader. 

I. ὁρῶν: with παρορῶντας (5), φυ- 
λαττομένους, and ἔχοντας (Μ. T. 904). 

2. ὑπὸ τῶν.. διεφθαρμένων : express- 
ing the agency by which the condition 
described in παρορῶντας etc. was effected, 
as if the participles were passive. 

3. Tap ἑκατέροις, i.e. in both Thebes 
and Athens. 


For Athens the great danger 
was that her old enmity against Thebes — 


might prevent her from taking the only 


safe course, union with Thebes. For — 


Philip’s way of working, in such cases, 
see § 61. Dissen contrasts map’ ἑκατέροις, 


apud utrosque seorsim, 77 each city, with 
ἀμφοτέροις (4 ), utrisque simul, doth. 

4. τὸ... αὐξάνεσθαι : appositive to the 
omitted antecedent of 8 (3), which is the 
object of παρορῶντας etc. 


a 


282 


TEP] TOY STEPANOY [19 


5 , » 9 A , σι 
ἑτοίμως ἔχοντας, ὅπως τοῦτο μὴ γένοιτο παρατηρῶν διετέ. 


λουν, οὐκ ἀπὸ τῆς ἐμαυτοῦ γνώμης μόνον ταῦτα συμφέρειν 
ὑπολαμβάνων, ἀλλ᾽ εἰδὼς ᾿Αριστοφῶντα καὶ πάλιν Εὔβουλον 
4 Ν Ψ Zz ~ ὧν Ν , 
πάντα τὸν χρόνον βουλομένους πρᾶξαι ταύτην τὴν φιλίαν, 
Ν Ν lal » / 9 v2 ε a Af) 
καὶ περὶ τῶν add\wy πολλάκις ἀντιλέγοντας ἑαυτοῖς τοῦθ 
ὁμογνωμονοῦντας ἀεί. ods σὺ ζῶντας μὲν, ὦ κίναδος, 
, / id > 5 > / 
κολακεύων παρηκολούθεις, τεθνεώτων δ᾽ οὐκ αἰσθάνει κατη- 
A ἃ Ν Ν ΄ 3 ἣν 3 \ > , \ 
γορῶν' a yap περὶ Θηβαίων ἐπιτιμᾷς ἐμοὶ, ἐκείνων πολὺ 
μᾶλλον ἢ ἐμοῦ κατηγορεῖς, τῶν πρότερον ἢ ἐγὼ ταύτην τὴν 
συμμαχίαν δοκιμασάντων. ἀλλ᾽ ἐκεῖσ᾽ ἐπάνειμι, ὅτι τὸν 
ἐν ᾿Αμφίσσῃ πόλεμον τούτου μὲν ποιήσαντος, συμπερανα- 
᾽ὔὕ Ν al » ἴω la 5 Pe \ Ν 4 
μένων δὲ τῶν ἄλλων τῶν συνεργῶν αὐτῷ THY πρὸς Θηβαίους 
ἔχθραν, συνέβη τὸν Φίλιππον ἐλθεῖν ἐφ᾽ ἡμᾶς, οὗπερ ἕνεκα 


7. μὴ τοῦτο Ο. γένοιτο Σ, 14; γενήσηται L?; γενήσεται vulg. 
§ 162. 3. καὶ (before περὶ) om. A2. πολλάκις om. V6. 
ἑαυτοῖς εἰς ΑΙ. 2. 4. ὁμολογοῦντας A2. ws (for ὦ) Ar. 
5. αἰσθάνει D; αἰσθάνῃ L; αἰσχύνῃ vulg. 
§ 168. 2. τούτους (corr. to τούτου) Σ. 3: 
ὑμᾶς V6. . 


8. μόνον om. A2. 


ἑαυτοῖς om. =}; 
κίναιδος At. 


Θηβαίους Σ, L, Ar; τοὺς On. vulg. 
4. 


7. ὅπως τοῦτο (τὸ προσκρούειν) μὴ 
γένοιτο: most Mss. have the more com- [,Θυοίγα in 371. See § 98° and note. 
mon γενήσεται (M. T. 339, 340).—7rapa- 4. οὕς: object of κολακεύων. 
τηρῶν διετέλουν, J kept continual watch. 5. παρηκολούθεις is more than you 

8. ταῦτα: the policy of friendship were one of their followers; it means you 


379 B.C. This friendship was broken after 


_ with Thebes (ταύτην τὴν φιλίαν, καὶ 162%), 


implied in ὅπως τοῦτο μὴ γένοιτο. 

8 162. 1. ᾿Αριστοφῶντα (see § 70%), 
a leading statesman of the earlier period 
and a strong friend of Thebes. Aesch. 
says of him (III. 139), πλεῖστον χρόνον 
τὴν Tov Bowridfew ὑπομείνας αἰτίαν .--- 
HuBovdov (§ 70+): see Hist. ὃ 12; Grote 
XI. 387; Schaefer 1. 186. 

2. βουλομένους and ὁμογνωμονοῦντας 
(4) are imperfect, past to εἰδὼς and διε- 
τέλουν ; but ἀντιλέγοντας (3), though they 
opposed one another, is present to ὁμογν.; 
to which it is subordinate. — ταύτην 
τὴν φιλίαν : the friendship for Thebes 
during the oppressive Spartan supremacy, 
which appeared in the aid privately sent 
by Athens to Thebes when she expelled 
the Spartan garrison from the Cadmea in 


followed them round or hung on to them 
in a servile way. Eubulus was one of 
the συνήγοροι who supported Aesch. at 
his trial for παραπρεσβεία (see Aesch. II. 
184). The anonymous Life of Aeschines 
makes him a clerk to both Eubulus and 
Aristophon. 

6. ἃ... ἐπιτιμᾷς : the charge of favour- 
ing Thebes in the terms of the alliance in 
339—338 B.c. (Aesch. 141—143). 

ὃ 163. 1. ἐκεῖσ᾽, i.e. fo the main 
point. 

2. ποιήσαντος, συμπεραναμένων : συμ- 
implies that, while Aesch. got up the 
Amphissian war by himself, he had active 
helpers in stirring up enmity at Athens 
against Thebes. When all was ready, 
Philip appeared at Elatea (ἐλθεῖν ἐφ᾽ 
ἡμᾶς, 4): cf. § 168°. 


162 


5 


163 


d 
; 
᾿ 
l 


164 


120 


ΔΗΛΛΟΣΘΕΝΟΥΣ 


5 τὰς πόλεις οὗτοι συνέκρουον, καὶ εἰ μὴ προεξανέστημεν 
Ν »Q> 3 A x > ’ὔ Ψ rb l4 
μικρὸν, οὐδ᾽ ἀναλαβεῖν av ἠδυνήθημεν: οὕτω μέχρι πόρρω 


, a 
Tponyayov OUTOL. 


ἐν οἷς δ᾽ HT ἤδη τὰ πρὸς ἀλλήλους, 


la / > 4, \ ἴω 3 ᾿ 
τουτωνὶ τῶν ψηφισμάτων ἀκούσαντες καὶ τῶν ἀποκρίσεων 


εἴσεσθε. 


καί μοι λέγε ταῦτα λαβών. 


ΨΗΦΙΣΜΑ. 


τος, φυλῆς πρυτανευούσης 


[Ἐπὶ ἄρχοντος ‘HporvGov, μηνὸς ἐλαφηβολιῶνος ἕκτῃ φθίνον- 
᾿Βρεχθηΐδος, βουλῆς καὶ στρατηγῶν 


7 > \ , “Ὁ \ / / an ᾽ , 
γνώμῃ, ἐπειδὴ Φίλιππος ἃς μὲν κατείληφε πόλεις τῶν ἀστυγειτόνων, 
\ \ lal / \ Peek! \ > \ ly 
τινὰς δὲ πορθεῖ, κεφαλαίῳ δὲ ἐπὶ τὴν ᾿Αττικὴν παρασκευάζεται 


. 7 > O\ ς / \ ς / f. \ 
5 παραγίγνεσθαι, παρ᾽ οὐδὲν ἡγούμενος τὰς ἡμετέρας συνθήκας, Kal 


τοὺς ὅρκους λύειν ἐπιβάλλεται καὶ τὴν εἰρήνην, παραβαίνων τὰς 
κοινὰς πίστεις, δεδόχθαι τῇ βουλῇ καὶ τῷ δήμῳ πέμπειν πρὸς 
αὐτὸν πρέσβεις, οἵτινες αὐτῷ διαλέξονται καὶ παρακαλέσουσιν 
αὐτὸν μάλιστα μὲν τὴν πρὸς ἡμᾶς ὁμόνοιαν διατηρεῖν καὶ τὰς 


10 συνθήκας, εἰ δὲ μὴ, πρὸς τὸ βουλεύσασθαι δοῦναι χρόνον τῇ πόλει 
καὶ τὰς ἀνοχὰς ποιήσασθαι μέχρι τοῦ θαργηλιῶνος μηνός. 


᾿ἠρέθη- 


σαν ἐκ τῆς βουλῆς Σῖμος ᾿Αναγυράσιος, Εὐθύδημος Φυλάσιος, 


Βουλαγόρας ᾿Αλωπεκῆθεν.] 


5. προσεξανέστημεν (προσ- corr. 


to προ-) Σ΄. 6. 
ἀναλαβεῖν Σ, L1, Ar; ἀναλαβεῖν αὑτοὺς (or αὐτοὺς) vulg. Ve 


οὐδ᾽ ἂν F. 3 om. V6. 
οὗτοι. = (yp), AI; 


οὗτοι τὴν ExOpav 2, A2, ® (yp), B (yp); οὗτοι τὸ πρᾶγμα L?, Bk; τὸν Φίλιππον δὴ 


(λ over δὴ) L}, w. otro. in mg. 


οὗτοι" οὐ προσγράφοντες τὴν ἔχθραν, 


λαβών om. Ar; λέγε (alone) V6. 


in τα ΟΣ 
ὡς εἶναι τὸ νόημα, 
Φίλιππον, ἀλλ᾽ οὐ τὴν ἔχθραν ὡς ἡ γραφὴ αὕτη ἔχει." 8. 


“vo οὕτω μέχρι πόρρω προήγαγον 
προήγαγον οὗτοι τὸν 
τούτων V6. Qe) nal 


For titles here and before § 165, = has VH®IZSMATA and ΨΗΦΙΣΜΑ; and before 
§§ 166 and 167 AIIOKPIZEI® twice (for AITOKPIZI2). 


5. εἰ μὴ..-«μικρὸν, 27 we had not roused 
ourselves a little too soon (for the success 
of the plot): μικρόν chiefly affects προ-. 

6. ἀναλαβεῖν, 20 recover (intrans.) : cf. 
Plat. Rep. 467 B, ποιῆσαι καὶ τὴν ἄλλην 
πόλιν ἀδύνατον ἀναλαβεῖν.---οὕτω with 
μέχρι πόρρω, so far. 

7. προήγαγον, carried it, i.e. the 
quarrel with Thebes. I follow = (yp) in 
omitting τὴν ἔχθραν, though for a different 
reason (see critical note): τὸ πρᾶγμα 
would give the right sense, but no object 
is needed. 

8,  Wydiopatov, 


ἀποκρίσεων: as 


these documents were quoted to show 
the enmity between Thebes and Athens 
at the time of Philip’s invasion, the W- 
φίσματα were probably Athenian decrees 
enacting measures hostile to Thebes, and 
the replies were remonstrances or retali- 
atory measures on the part of Thebes. 
Nothing could be more absurd than the 
two decrees against Philip and the two 
letters of Philip which appear in the text. 
See ἃ 168", where Philip is said to have 
been elated (ἐπαρθείς) by the decrees and 
the replies, i.e. by the evidence of hostility 
which they showed. 


nce ete 


ad 


bg ΠΕΡῚ TOY 2TE®ANOY 121 


ETEPON WH®ISMA. 


5 [Emi ἄρχοντος ροπύθου, μηνὸς μουνυχιῶνος ἕνῃ καὶ νέᾳ, 165 
᾿ς πολεμάρχου γνώμῃ, ἐπειδὴ Φίλιππος εἰς ἀλλοτριότητα Θηβαίους 
πρὸς ἡμᾶς ἐπιβάλλεται καταστῆσαι, παρεσκεύασται δὲ καὶ παντὶ 
τῷ στρατεύματι πρὸς τοὺς ἔγγιστα τῆς ᾿Αττικῆς παραγίγνεσθαι 
283 τόπους, παραβαίνων τὰς πρὸς ἡμᾶς ὑπαρχούσας αὐτῷ συνθήκας, 5 
᾿ δεδόχθαι τῇ βουλῇ καὶ τῷ δήμῳ πέμψαι πρὸς αὐτὸν κήρυκα καὶ 
᾿ πρέσβεις, οἵτινες ἀξιώσουσι καὶ παρακαλέσουσιν αὐτὸν ποιήσασθαι 
τὰς ἀνοχᾶς, ὅπως ἐνδεχομένως ὁ δῆμος βουλεύσηται" καὶ γὰρ νῦν 
᾿ς οὐκέκρικε βοηθεῖν ἐν οὐδενὶ τῶν μετρίων. ἠρέθησαν ἐκ τῆς βουλῆς 
| Νέαρχος Σωσινόμου, Πολυκράτης ᾿Ιὑπίφρονος, καὶ κῆρυξ Buugues 10 
᾿Αναφλύστιος ἐκ τοῦ δήμου. “----- 


Ι ' 
| Λέγε δὴ καὶ τὰς ἀποκρίσεις. 166 


ΑΠΟΚΡΙΣΙΣ ΑΘΗΝΑΙΟΙ͂Σ. 


[Βασιλεὺς Μακεδόνων Φίλιππος ᾿Αθηναίων τῇ βουλῇ καὶ τῷ 
δήμῳ χαίρειν. ἣν μὲν ἀπ᾽ ἀρχῆς εἴχετε πρὸς ἡμᾶς αἵρεσιν, οὐκ 
ἀγνοῶ, καὶ τίνα σπουδὴν ποιεῖσθε προσκαλέσασθαι βουλόμενοι 5 
Θετταλοὺς καὶ Θηβαίους, ἔτι δὲ καὶ Βοιωτούς" βέλτιον δ᾽ αὐτῶν 
φρονούντων καὶ μὴ βυυλομένων ἐφ᾽ ὑμῖν ποιήσασθαι τὴν ἑαυτῶν 
i, αἵρεσιν, ἀλλὰ κατὰ TO συμφέρον ἱσταμένων, νῦν ἐξ ὑποστροφῆς 
| ἀποστείλαντες ὑμεῖς πρός με πρέσβεις Kal κήρυκα συνθηκῶν 
Ὶ 
| 


4 / \ ae \ ΔΕ ἐνὶ a) JINN pics pd te A 

| μνημονεύετε καὶ τὰς ἀνοχᾶς αἰτεῖσθε, κατ᾽ οὐδὲν ὑφ᾽ ἡμῶν πεπλημ- τὸ 
ο΄ μελημένοι. ἐγὼ μέντοι ἀκούσας τῶν πρεσβευτῶν συγκατατίθεμαι 

] ᾿ τοῖς παρακαλουμένοις καὶ ἕτοιμός εἰμι ποιεῖσθαι τὰς ἀνοχὰς, ἄν 

| περ τοὺς οὐκ ὀρθῶς συμβουλεύοντας ὑμῖν παραπέμψαντες τῆς 

| προσηκούσης ἀτιμίας ἀξιώσητε. éppwale.| 


[Βασιλεὺς Μακεδόνων Φίλιππος Θηβαίων τῇ βουλῇ καὶ τῷ 167 
δήμῳ Χαίρειν. ἐκομισάμην τὴν Tap ὑμῶν ἐπιστολὴν, δι᾿ ἧς μοι 
284 τὴν ὁμόνοιαν ἀνανεοῦσθε καὶ τὴν, εἰρήνην ὄντως ἐμοὶ ποιεῖτε. 


ΑΠΟΚΡΙΣΙῚΣ ΘΗΒΑΙΟΙΣ. 
: 
f 


πυνθάνομαι μέντοι διότι πᾶσαν ὑμῖν ᾿Αθηναῖοι προσφέρονται 

᾿ φιλοτιμίαν βουλόμενοι ὑ ὑμᾶς συγκαταίνους γενέσθαι τοῖς ὑπ᾽ αὐτῶν 5 

παρακαλουμένοις. πρότερον μὲν οὖν ὑμῶν κατεγίγνωσκον ἐπὶ τῷ 
, / a > ᾿ > 7 A ΤΟ A 5 A a 

μέλλειν πείθεσθαι ταῖς ἐκείνων ἐλπίσι Kal ἐπακολουθεῖν αὐτῶν TH 

“ la) \ n 
προαιρέσει. νῦν δ᾽ ἐπιγνοὺς ὑμᾶς τὰ πρὸς ἡμᾶς ἐξητηκότας ἔχειν 
εἰρήνην μᾶλλον ἢ ταῖς. ἑτέρων ἐπακολουθεῖν γνώμαις, ἥσθην καὶ 


, 4 
> 


=a 


168 


122 AHMOZOENOY> 


an n fal > \ a - Ud Ζ 
10 μᾶλλον ὑμᾶς ἐπαινῶ κατὰ πολλὰ, μάλιστα δ᾽ ἐπὶ τῷ βουλεύσασθαι 


\ tf . / \ N \ ς an 4 > >? / Η ὅ 
περὶ τούτων ἀσφαλέστερον καὶ τὰ πρὸς ἡμᾶς ἔχειν ἐν εὐνοίᾳ" ὅπερ 
a : \ 7 i SN / / 
οὐ μικρὰν ὑμῖν οἴσειν ἐλπίζω ῥοπὴν, ἐάν περ ἐπὶ ταύτης μένητε 


τῆς προθέσεως. ἔρρωσθε. 


Οὕτω διαθεὶς ὁ Φίλιππος τὰς πόλεις πρὸς ἀλλήλας διὰ 


» \ 4 > ἮΝ A ἃ," \ A tee 
τούτων, καὶ τούτοις ἐπαρθεὶς τοις ψηφίσμασι καὶ ταις ἀπο- 


κρίσεσιν, ἧκεν Ἔχων τὴν δύναμιν καὶ τὴν ᾿Ελάτειαν κατέ. 


λαβεν, ὡς οὐδ᾽ ἂν εἴ τι γένοιτ᾽ ἔτι συμπνευσάντων ἂν ἡμῶν 


5 καὶ τῶν Θηβαίων. 


ἀλλὰ μὴν τὸν τότε συμβάντ᾽ ἐν τῇ 


9 Ψ 
πόλει θόρυβον ἰστε μὲν ἅπαντες: μικρὰ δ᾽ ἀκούσαθ᾽ ὅμως 


Lo αὐτὰ τὰ] ἀναγκαιότατα. 
1 ns 


ἑσπέρα μὲν γὰρ ἦν, ἧκε δ᾽ ἀγγέλλων τις ὡς τοὺς 


iu 
4 
᾿ 
᾿ 


8 168. 1. ἀλλήλους Y. ἃ: 
Dind., Vom., West., Lips., BI. 
5. ἐν οἴη. Al. Ws 

§ 169. τ. 


§ 168. τ. οὕτω: ie. as the docu- 
ments showed. 

4. ὡς οὐδ᾽ ἂν.. συμπνευσάντων ἀν, i.e. 
Seeling (ws) that under no possible circum- 
stances would the Thebans and ourselves 
become harmonious: συμπνευσάντων ἂν 
represents συμπνεύσαιμεν dv. The MSS. 
all have συμπνευσόντων ἄν, which Bekker 
retains. There would be no more ob- 
jection to the future participle with ἄν, 
representing the fut. indic. with dp, 
than to the latter, or to the fut. infin. 
with ἄν. It is generally allowed to stand 
in Plat. Apol. 30B; Dem. Ix. 70, and 
XIX. 342. But here it would represent 
the future optative with ἄν, for which 
there is no recognized authority. More- 
over, the future of πνέω is not πνεύσω, 
but πνεύσομαι" or mvevooduat, and this 
should be decisive (see Veitch). See 
M. T. 216; and for the repetition of ἄν, 
223. 

6. μικρὰ ἀναγκαιότατα: see ὃ 1264 
and note. Most MSs. give αὐτὰ τὰ ἀναγ- 
καιότατα here, perhaps correctly. 

§§ 169—180. Here follows the 
famous description of the panic in Athens 
when the news of the seizure of Elatea 


συμπνευσόντων all MSS.; συμπνευσάντων Elmsl., 
(See note below.) 
αὐτὰ τὰ ἀναγκ. vulg.; αὐτὰ τὰ om. ΣΙ, 1,1; τὰ om. L?. 


ἀγγέλων O; ἀπαγγέλλων Β. 


ὑμῶν (w. ἡ over v) F, V6.5 


arrived, and of the meeting of the As- 


sembly which was suddenly called to con- 
sider the alarming situation. 
celebrated example of διατύπωσις, vivid 
delineation. 

§ 169. 1. The succession of tenses, 
nv, ἧκε (had come), and 


narrative lively and picturesque at the — 
outset. Much would have been lost 
if he had said ἦλθε δ᾽ ἀγγέλλων τις 
ws κατειλημμένη cts τοὺς πρυτά- 
vets: the message came to the Prytanes, 


the fifty senators of one of the ten tribes, 


who for their term of one-tenth of 
year represented the authority of th 


State. Their office was the θόλος or 
σκιάς, a round building with a cupola in ; 
the ἀγορά, adjoining the Senate house and 


the μητρῷον with its record-office. There 
the ἐπιστάτης of the Prytanes was ex- 
pected to spend his whole day and 

of office, with a third of the Prytanes ν 

he had selected (Arist. Pol. Ath. 445), 
as to be accessible in emergencies Hil ce 
meals for all the Prytanes. The θόλος is 
distinct from the ancient Prytaneum Οἵ 


This is 8. 


NTT a (the. 
direct form for the indirect), makes the : 


the present; and there the State provided 


i Ψοῤλαιάα 


0 —————————————————eUuo—OOEeEeEeEeEeEeEeEeEeEeEeEeeeeeeEeEeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeEeEeEeEeEeEeEeEeEeEeEeEeEeerrrermrrese 
. 
“ oun, 
"4 ἴ Ἢ 


MEP] TOY ΣΤΕΦΑΝΟῪ 123 


4 e > / νΨ») 
πρυτάνεις ὡς λάτεια κατείληπται. 


\ \ A ε \ 
και ἊΣ ἐς ταυτα Ol RAE 


εὐθὺς ἐξαναστάντες μεταξὺ δειπνοῦντες τούς τ᾽ ἐκ τῶν σκηνῶν 


τῶν κατὰ τὴν ἀγορὰν ἐξείργον καὶ τὰ γέρρα ἐνεπίμπρασαν, 
οἱ δὲ τοὺς στρατηγοὺς μετεπέμποντο καὶ τὸν σαλπικτὴν 


ἐκάλουν: καὶ θορύβου πλήρης ἦν ἡ πόλις. | ἡ τῇ δ᾽ ὑστεραίᾳ 
ἅμα τῇ ἡμέρᾳ οἱ μὲν πρυτάνεις τὴν Bounnv ἐκάλουν εἰς TO 


5. χοὺς ὁ. O. 


City Hall, where certain privileged per- 
sons (ἀείσιτοι) had their meals αἵ ἃ public 
table, to which ambassadors and other 
guests of the State were sometimes in- 


᾿ς vited. 


3. τοὺς. σκηνῶν: cf. § 44°. 

4. τὰ γέρρα, probably the wicker-work 
with which the booths (σκῆναι) in. the 
market-place were covered. The word 
can mean also anything made of twigs, 
and is used of a wicker fence which en- 
closed the ἐκκλησία (see Harpocr. under 
γέρρα, and LIX. go). But the close con- 
nection of the two clauses, drove out those 
in the booths and burnt the γέρρα, shows 
that the yéppa which were burnt were 
taken from the booths. Otherwise there 
is no reason for driving the poor hucksters 
out at all. If it is said that this was 
done to prepare for the “‘monster meet- 
ing” the next morning, we must re- 


“member, first, that the Assembly was 


held in the Pnyx, not in the ἀγορά; and, 
secondly, that there was to be a meeting 
of the Senate before that of the Assembly, 
which would give time enough to make 
all necessary preparations after daybreak. 
To suppose, further, that the booths were 
torn to pieces and burnt on the spot after 


dark, merely to clear the ἀγορά, when — 


there was no pressure of time, even if 
the place needed clearing at all, is to 


- impute to the Prytanes conduct little 


Short of madmen. Such a panic as this 
senseless proceeding would have caused 
was surely the last object which these 
guardians of the State could have had, 


_when they left their supper unfinished and 


hastened into the market-place. Their 


σαλπικτὴν =, Τ᾿, F, Y, ®; 


σαλπιγκτὴν vulg. 


first object certainly was to secure a full 
meeting of the Assembly the next morn- 
ing. It will be noticed that while some 
(οἱ μὲν) of the Prytanes were engaged in 
clearing the booths, others (oi δὲ) were 
summoning the ten Generals. The Gene- 
rals and the Prytanes had the duty of 
calling special meetings of the Assembly 
(ἐκκλησίας συγκλήτου): see Thuc. Iv. 
118°2, ἐκκλησίαν δὲ ποιήσαντας τοὺς oTpa- 
τηγοὺς καὶ τοὺς πρυτάνεις, and 11. 501} (of 
Pericles), σύλλογον ποιήσας (ἔτι δ᾽ ἐστρα- 
τήγει). There can, therefore, be hardly ἃ 
doubt that the two acts were connected 
with summoning the Assembly. To do 
this effectually it was necessary to alarm 
the whole of Attica immediately; and the 
natural method for this was to light bon- 
fires on some of the hills near Athens, 
which would be a signal to distant demes 
to light fires on their own hills. A fire on 
Lycabettus could thus give signals directly 
and indirectly to the whole of Attica, and 
probably this was understood as a call of 
the citizens to a special Assembly. As 
material for lighting signal fires might not 
always be on hand, it is likely that the 
dry covering of the booths struck the 
eyes of the Prytanes as they came out of 
their office, and that they took them in 
their haste for this purpose. Their high au- 
thority was needed to prevent resistance 
on the part of the owners of the booths. 

5. σαλπικτὴν: to give signals with 
his trumpet. 

7. τὴν βουλὴν ἐκάλουν: see Arist. 
Pol. Ath. 44’, ἐπειδὰν συναγάγωσιν οἱ 
πρυτάνεις τὴν βουλὴν ἢ τὸν δῆμον. 


5. 


134 ΔΗΛΛΟΣΘΕΝΟῪΣ 


,ὕ ε a a 3 Χ > ἧς 5 Ψ θ Ν Sc 
βουλευτήριον, ὑμεῖς δ᾽ εἰς τὴν ἐκκλησίαν ἐπορεύεσθε, Kat 285 
πρὶν ἐκείνην χρηματίσαι καὶ προβουλεῦσαι πᾶς ὁ δῆμος. 

la ἴω 5 XN Χ 

170 ἄνω καθῆτο. Ψἧ καὶ μετὰ ταῦτα ὡς ἦλθεν ἡ βουλὴ καὶ 
ων bw 
ἀπήγγειλαν οἵ πρυτάνεις TA προσηγγελμέν᾽ ἑαυτοῖς καὶ TOV 
y nan => ' “ / 
ἥκοντα "παρήγαγον κἀκεῖνος εἶπεν, ἠρώτα μὲν ὁ κῆρυξ τίς 
=f, > > / ’ὔ Ν ἴω 
ἀγορεύειν ἜΣ δ᾽ οὐδείς. i: ολλάκις δὲ τοῦ 
5 κήρυκος ἐρωτῶντος οὐδὲν μᾶλλον ἀνίστατ᾽ οὐδεὶς, ἁπάντων 
μὲν τῶν στρατηγῶν παρόντων, ἁπάντων δὲ τῶν ῥητόρων, 
᾽7ὔ x “A “ ἴω πὰ A Ν 5 ἴω ἌΝ \ 
καλούσης δὲ τῇ κοινῇ τῆς πατρίδος φωνῇ τὸν ἐροῦνθ᾽ ὑπὲρ 
σωτηρίας 'βὴν γὰρ ὁ κῆρυξ κατὰ τοὺς νόμους φωνὴν ἀφίησι, β 
171 ταύτην κοινὴν τῆς πατρίδος δίκαιόν ἐστιν ἡγεῖσθαι. καίτοι 
> \ \ A“ Ν ᾿ς , ΄“ 5», : 
εἰ μὲν τοὺς σωθῆναι THY πόλιν βουλομένους παρελθεῖν ἔδει, 

, x ε la \ cy 5 as 3 ΄, 32 ἐν be 
πάντες ἂν ὑμεῖς καὶ οἱ ἀλλοι ᾿Αθηναῖοι ἀναστάντες ἐπὶ τὸ 
=e 9 δί , Ν is’ ν θῃ > Ἂς > 4, 
Bn ἐβαδίζετε: πάντες yap old. ὅτι σωθῆναι αὐτὴν ἐβού- 


8. ἐπορεύεσθε (αι over final ε) Σ᾽ ; ἐπορεύεσθαι Ο. 9: 


ὃ 170. 1. ἦλθεν J, 1, Φ, Ar. 2; εἰσῆλθεν vulg. . 2. avrots Art. 
4. Wwodddake Y. 6. ἁπάντων om. 2}. τῶν om. Ὁ. 7: καλούσης... 
φωνῇ At. 42; Kar. δὲ “τῆς κοινῆς πατρίδος φωνῇ D; τῆς κοινῆς τῆς πατρίδος φωνῆς ΤΩ 


πᾶς ὁ δῆμος om. V6. 


vulg. ; ; τῆς πατρίδος τῇ κοινῇ φωνῇ Σ (yp), ᾧ (v 


κοινῇ πατρίδος φωνῇ Vom. 
ἱ 5 18) 
§ 171. 4. 


κατὰ τοὺς γάμον om. V6. 


οἶδ᾽ ὅτι D; εὖ οἵδ᾽ ὅτι L, vulg. 


P)» BE. , Bl. with τῇ x. dwvnin[ 17; τῇ 
9. ἐστιν om. 


ἠβούλεσθε Ar, Νό. ᾿ 
ας ὡς 


9. χρηματίσαι καὶ προβουλεῦσαι, 
proceed to business and pass a vote (προ- 
βούλευμα). 

10. ἄνω καθῆτο, ie. the people in 
their impatience were already seated in 
the Pnyx: dvw shows that the Assembly 
sat on a hill, probably. in the place 
now known as the Pnyx. See Xxv. Ὁ 
and 20, τὸν δῆμον eis THY ἐκκλησίαν ἀνα- 
βαίνειν. For the identity of this famous 
place, see Crow in Papers of the Ameri- 
can School at Athens, Iv. pp. 205-260. 

§ 170. 1. ἤλθεν ἡ βουλὴ, i.e. when, 
after the adjournment of the Senate, 
the senators entered the Assembly. The 
common reading εἰσῆλθεν wants the best 
MS. authority. 

2. ἀπήγγειλαν οἱ πρυτάνεις : the fifty 
Prytanes were still the chief men in both 
Senate and Assembly, though at this time 
(certainly since 377 B.c) the duty of 
presiding in both bodies was given to nine 


πρόεδροι, who were Goset by lot each 
day from the senators of the ‘other nine 
tribes by the ἐπιστάτης of the: Prytanes 
(Arist. Pol. Ath. 447-*). The πρόέδροι 


had an ἐπιστάτης of their own, called ~ 
ὁ ἐπιστάτης τῶν προέδρων (Aesch. 111. 39). 


This is the office held by Demosthenes in 
the last meeting of the Assembly before 
the departure of the second embassy in 
346: see Aesch. Il. 74; Hist. ὃ 38.— 
τὸν ἥκοντα, the messenger who had 
brought the news: cf. § 28°. 

3. τίς ἀγορεύειν βούλεται; the regu- 


lar formula for opening a debate: cf. § 


1015. Aeschines (111. 2 and 4) laments 


the omission of the additional words, τῶν 
ὑπὲρ πεντήκοντα ἔτη γεγονότων καὶ πάλιν 
ἐν μέρει τῶν ἄλλων ᾿Αθηναίων, the Solonic 
form. 

7. τὸν ἐροῦνθ᾽ -- ὃς ἐρεῖ, the man to 
speak (Μ. T. 565): 


cf. § 285°, 


pl Aspects 


| 
᾿ 
q TEP! TOY ZTE®ANOY (25 


λεσθε: εἰ δὲ τοὺς πλουσιωτάτους, οἵ τριακόσιοι" εἰ δὲ τοὺς 5 


3 ’ὔ lal \ » “ ’ Ν Ξ Ν 
᾿ς ἀμφότερα ταῦτα, καὶ εὔνους τῇ πόλει καὶ πλουσίους, OL μετὰ 
᾿ Rg bs ΄ , \ \ / \ 
ταῦτα τὰς μεγάλας ἐπιδόσεις ἐπιδόντες: Kal yap εὐνοίᾳ καὶ 


4 Pi 42 > ᾿ 5 3 ε » 3 ~ ε Ν 
πλούτῳ τοῦτ ἐποίησαν. ἀλλ᾽ ὡς εοικεν, ἐκεῖνος ὁ καιρὸς 172 
5 Χ ε ε 4 > 4 > if » Ν 4 A 3 
καὶ ἡ ἡμέρα ‘Kelvyn οὐ μόνον εὔνουν καὶ πλούσιον ἀνὸρ 
3 4 5 Ἂν Ν / “A 4 > 3 “~ 
ἐκάλει, ἀλλὰ καὶ παρηκολουθηκότα τοῖς πράγμασιν ἐξ ἀρχῆς, 

% ἴων Y att J » 
καὶ συλλελογισμένον ὀρθῶς τίνος ἕνεκα ταῦτ᾽ ἔπραττεν ὁ 
/ Ν ᾿ς ε Ν Ἂν ‘eg. > Ν 3 
Φίλιππος καὶ τί βουλόμενος: 6 γὰρ μὴ ταῦτ᾽ εἰδὼς μηδ᾽ 5 

9 \ ,ὕ > las » > 3 ¥ > ¥ 9 3 
᾿ς ἐξητακὼς πόρρωθεν ἐπιμελῶς, οὔτ᾽ εἰ εὔνους HY OUT εἰ 
ἡ" , 50" σι ΕΣ δ | Ψ Ν A » 
πλούσιος, οὐδὲν μᾶλλον ἤμελλεν ὅ τι χρὴ ποιεῖν εἰσεσθ 
οὐδ᾽ ὑμῖν ἕξειν συμβουλεύειν. ἐφάνην τοίνυν οὗτος ἐν ἐκείνῃ 173΄-. 
᾿ οὐδ᾽ ὑμ μ εἰν. ἐφάνη 0 
| { ag ε ὔὕ 5 Ν \ \ > > ε ῪΜ 4 la 
286 τῇ ἡμέρᾳ ἐγὼ, καὶ παρελθὼν εἶπον eis ὑμᾶς, a μου δυοῖν 
| Ψ 3 3 lal ie) fa) 
ἕνεκ᾽ ἀκούσατε προσσχόντες τὸν νοῦν, ἑνὸς μὲν, ἵν᾿ εἰδῆτε 

4 / ω Ν Ἂς \ ia 
OTL μόνος τῶν λεγόντων καὶ πολιτευομένων ἐγὼ τὴν τῆς 
8. ταῦτ᾽ V6. 
ἐξ ἀρχῆς (repeated before ὀρθῶς, 1. 4) Z, L; erased in 1. 4 in %, in 1. 3 
ΝΠ 5. μηδ 2, L, Ar; μήτ᾽ vulg. 6. πόρρωθεν X'; πόρρ. ἐπιμελῶς &?, 


L, vulg. εἰ (before εὔνους) om. B. 7. εἴσεσθε (at above) 2; ἔσεσθαι O. 


| § 173. 1. οὕτως L; om. O. 2. πρὸς (above els) B. ἡμᾶς O. ἅμα 
' (for ἅ μου) Β. 3. προσσχόντες ᾧ, Bk., Dind., Lips., Bl.; προσχόντες Σ, L, 
| Vom., West. ; προσέχοντες vulg. 


7. ἐπιδιδόντες A2. 
8172. 3. 


8 171. 5. ot τριακόσιοι, the Three 
τς Aundred: see note on ὃ 103°. 
| 6. ἀμφότερα ταῦτα: 
«$1394, . 
᾿ς ἡ, τὰς μεγάλας ἐπιδόσεις, the large 
contributions, made after the battle of 


ὁ καιρὸς... ἐκάλει (§ 1721): cf. § 2829, οὗ- 
Tos εὑρέθης. 

see note on 2. ἃ. ἀκούσατε: relative as obj. of 
imperative, as we say which do at your 
peril. For this in οἷσθ᾽ ὃ δρᾶσον; and 


similar expressions, see M. T. 253, and 


more likely to know. 


Chaeronea (Hist. § 80): μετὰ ταῦτα refers 
to the events which ended in that battle. 

§ 172. 3. παρηκολουθηκότα, one 
who had followed the track of events. 
See XIX. 257 (end), and Ev. Luc. i. 3 
παρηκολουθηκότι ἄνωθεν πᾶσιν ἀκριβῶς 
(with ἄνωθεν here cf. πόρρωθεν in 1. 6, 
below). 

7. οὐδὲν... εἴσεσθαι, i.e. was none the 
I retain ἤμελλεν 
here and in § 1924, and ἔμελλον in ὃ 10174, 
with the best Mss. and most editors. 
Cf. XIX. 159, οὐ συστρατεύσειν ἔμελλον 
(so the best Mss.), lit. they were not going 
to join him (in that case): so hoc facturi 
erant, nisi venisset (M. T. 428). 
ΟΠ § 179. 1. οὗτος, that man, whom 


Postgate in Trans. of Cambr. Philol. Soc. 
III. I, pp. 50—55. 

3. προσσχόντες TOV νοῦν, allentively, 
cf. animum advertere. 

4. τὴν... «ἔλιπον, L did not desert my 
post of devotion to the state, i.e. I was 
never guilty of λιποταξία here. This. 
military figure was a favourite of De- 
mosthenes. See III, 36, μὴ παραχωρεῖν 
τῆς τάξεως ἣν ὑμῖν οἱ πρόγονοι THs ἀρετῆς... 
κατέλιπον (see Westermann’s note); Xv. 
32, 33 (with the figure often repeated); 
XIX. 9, 29; XXI. 120, λελοιπέναι τὴν τοῦ 
δικαίου τάξιν. The same figure is seen in 
ἐξηταζόμην (1. 6), in ἐξήτασαι (§ 197%), 
ἐξητάζετο (§ 2178), ἐξεταζομένην ὑπὲρ ὑμῶν 
(§ 277°), and in ἐξέτασις, a mustering (as 


5 


126 AHMOZOENOY2 


εὐνοίας τάξιν ἐν τοῖς δεινοῖς οὐκ ἔλιπον, ἀλλὰ καὶ λέγων καὶ 

us 3 / \ Qo 7 3 ε Ν ε la) 3 3 A a 
γράφων ἐξηταζόμην τὰ δέονθ᾽ ὑπὲρ ὑμῶν ἐν αὕτοις τοις 
φοβεροῖς, ἑτέρου δὲ, ὅτι μικρὸν ἀναλώσαντες χρόνον πολλῷ 


Ν Ἂς Ν ay / / » 3 3 / 
πρὸς τὰ λοιπὰ τῆς πάσης πολιτείας ἔσεσθ᾽ ἐμπειρότεροι. 


174} 


5 


175 


‘i 


ἰῷ»... 


CS el 
ey we 


Se CS τῶν 


ἂν / Ψ 
Εἶπον τοινυν ott 
, / 

“Τοὺς μὲν ὡς ὑπαρχόντων Θηβαίων Φιλίππῳ Mav θορυ- 

an , 5 ε ἴω > Ν 
βουμένους ἀγνοεῖν τὰ παρόντα πράγμαθ᾽ ἡγοῦμαι" εὖ γὰρ 
> 9 an y A x ΘΝ 
οἷδ᾽ ὅτι, εἰ τοῦθ᾽ οὕτως ἐτύγχανεν ἔχον, οὐκ ἂν αὑτὸν 
3 ’ὔ > > λ ’ + LAN. | beng “A ε / ε / 
ἠκούομεν ἐν ᾿Ελατείᾳ ὄντα, ἀλλ᾽ ἐπὶ τοῖς ἡμετέροις OpLoLs. 
Ψ ΄ 73> ¢ , Δ ὦ ΄, Ψ LQ) 
ὅτι μέντοι ἵν᾿ ἕτοιμα ποιήσηται τὰ ἐν Θήβαις ἥκει, σαφῶς 
CR ε > ¥ 9 4” ςς ἴω 3 Pe / > ἐὰν 
ἐπίσταμαι. ὡς δ᾽ ἔχει" ἔφην “ταῦτα, ἀκούσατέ μου. ἐκεινος 
yg x ἴω, ’ὔ x “A ΦΊΛΟΝ 
ὅσους ἢ πεῖσαι χρήμασι Θηβαίων ἢ ἐξαπατῆσαι ἐνῆν, 
-- la VA 3) i 
ἅπαντας εὐτρέπισται" τοὺς δ᾽ am ἀρχῆς ἀνθεστηκότας avT@ 


a, 


5. ἐξέλιπον V6. 6. ἡμών O. 
πολ. ᾧ; τῆς πολ. Νό. 
8174. 2. τῶν Θηβαίων A2, Β (corr.). 


φίλων Φιλίππῳ vulg.; φίλων om. Σ. 


6. ποιήσητε Σ (αι over ε), L (τε erased), O. 


Θηβαίοις vulg.; θήκαις (for Θήβαι9) 1... 
͵.8 175. 3. 


8. τῆς πάσης ἄλλης πολιτ. A2; πάσης τῆς 


φίλων Θηβαίων L; Φιλίππῳ φίλων κα; 
δ᾽ (for yap) V6. 5. νῦν ὄντα At. 
τὰ ἐν Θήβαις Σ, Ai, B(mg.); τὰ ἐν 

7. ἔφην ταῦτα Σ᾿; ταῦτα ἔφην vulg., Bl. 


εὐτρέπισται Σ, 1,1; ηὐτρέπισε O (mg.). 


of troops), a call for (88 3107, 320°). Here 
there is always an idea of being counted 
7m on one side or the other of some con- 
test. 

See Jackson’s note on εὔνοια in Trans. 
of Cambr. Philol. Soc. 11. p. 115, where 
he explains the word in Arist. Pol. 1. 6 
(1255%, 17) as “loyalty, i.e. the willing 
obedience which an inferior renders to a 
kind and considerate superior.” He re- 


fers to Xen. Oec. VII.- 37, IX. 5, 12, XII. Ὁ 


5—8, xv. 5, Hdt. v. 24, Polus Pythag. in 
Stob. Flor. 1x. 54 (Mein.), οἰκετᾶν δὲ ποτὶ 
δεσπότας εὔνοια, δεσποτᾶν δὲ ποτὶ θερά- 
ποντας καδεμονία, and other passages, 
especially Arist. Eth. 1X. 5, 88 3, 4, ὅλως 
δ᾽ εὔνοια dv’ ἀρετὴν καὶ ἐπιείκειάν Twa 
γίνεται, ὅταν τῳ φανῇ καλός τις ἢ ἀνδρεῖος 
4 τι τοιοῦτον. These examples show that 
εὔνοια may mean devotion based on any 
superiority or merit, including /oyalty of 
a subject to a prince or of a servant to his 
master (even of a dog to his mistress), 
devotion to a benefactor, and even en- 
thusiasm for the success of a contestant 


in the games (felt even by a stranger). 
Above it means a good citizen’s loyal 
devotion to the state. 

5. Aé€yov...€&nrafspnv (see last note), 
7 was found ready (at my post), when 
the test came, speaking and proposing 
measures. See West. and Bl. Fox 
(p. 162) thinks that the military figure 
may refer to the charge of λιποταξία 
at Chaeronea, which Aeschines repeat- 
edly makes against Demosthenes: see 
Aesch. 152, 159, 175, 176, 244, 253. 

7. πολλῷ... ἐμπειρότεροι, far more 
experienced for the future in the whole 
administration of the state (πολιτεία). 

§ 174. 1. - εἶπον Ott: introducing a 
direct quotation (M.T. 711). 

2. ὡς, Φιλίππῳ, cz the belief (as) 
that Philip can depend on the Thebans: 
cf. §§ 954, 228%.—OopvBoupévous, dis- 
turbed: cf. θορύβου, § 169%. 


6. ἵνα...ποιήσηται, 1.6. to prepare ἢ 


Thebes for his appearance there as a 
friend: cf. εὐτρέπισται (i.e. εὐτρεπεῖς 
πεποίηται), ὃ 175°. 


wm, a 


Looms 


one Amon hn μὲ 


ΠΕΡ TOY ΣΙΈΨΑΝΟΥ 


καὶ νῦν ἐναντιουμένους οὐδαμῶς πεῖσαι δύναται. 


[27 
τες 
, 5S Vv 
τί οὖν 
“βούλεται, καὶ τίνος εἵνεκα τὴν ᾿Ἐλάτειαν κατείληφεν; πλησίον 5 yD 
δύναμιν δείξας καὶ παραστήσας τὰ ὅπλα τοὺς μὲν ἑαυτοῦ Wd “τ 
ἮΝ ; “A lal 9 
φίλους ἐπᾶραι καὶ θρὰσεῖς ποιῆσαι, τοὺς δ᾽ ἐναντιουμένους 
ν “a ἴων 9 “ἃ , , aA lal 3 
καταπλῆξαι, π΄ συγχωρήσῶσι φοβηθέντες ἁ νῦν οὐκ 
ἐβέλόυσιν, ἢ βιασθῶσιν vel εἰ μὲν τοίνυν προαιρησόμεθ' 176 
| 
ἡμεῖς" ἔφην ᾿ 


Θηβαίοις πρὸς ἡμᾶς, τούτου μεμνῆσθαι καὶ ἀπιστεῖν αὐτοῖς 


“ἐν τῷ παβόντι; εἴ τι δύσκολον Pepa et 


᾿ς ὡς ἐν TH TOV ἐχθρῶν οὖσι μερίδι, πρῶτον μὲν av εὔξαυτο 
᾿ς Φίλιππος ποιήσομεν, εἶτα φοβοῦμαι μὴ προσδεξαμένων τῶν 5 
287 νῦν ἀνθεστηκότων αὐτῷ καὶ μιᾷ γνώμῃ πάντων φιλιππι- 


Ψ 5 Ν 3 Ν ¥ > / x / 
ἄντων, εἰς THY Αττικὴν ἔλθωσιν ἀμφότεροι. ἂν μεντοι 


4 A> > Ν ἊΝ Ἂν A . 7 > πὰ ae 
meoOnr ἐμοὶ καὶ πρὸς τῷ σκοπεῖν ἀλλὰ μὴ φιλονεικεῖν 
π΄ A ef ἃ "ὦ , θ > ears Ae? δόξει 
περὶ ὧν ἂν λέγω γένησθε, οἰμαι καὶ τὰ δέοντα λέγειν δόξειν 


ὅς, εἵνεκα Σ, L (cf. 88 1207, 1445). 


ἵνα πλησίον Σ, 1.1, 6, Vom.; ἵνα om. vulg. 


6. αὐτοῦ V6. 7: επαραι =; ἐπάραι (as opt. w. ἵνα) L; ἐπᾶραι vulg. ποιῆσαι 

| 2, L, vulg.; ἐπ. καὶ Opac. mo. Σ, L, ΑΙ. 2; θρασ. ποι. καὶ ἐπ. vulg. 8. κατα- 
πλῆξαι om. Σ᾽ (added below the line). 

— 8176. 1. τοίνυν 2; οὖν L, vulg. προαιρηθησόμεθα O, V6. 3. vuas V6. 
4. ἃ ἂν MSS.; avy Vom., WVest:, Bl. εὔξετο (αι over ε) Σ. 6. αὐτῷ 
-ov over -ῳ) Β. πάντων om, A2. 8. πεισθῆτ᾽ ἐμοὶ L3 πεισθήτεμοι = 5 

rOnré μοι vulg. φιλονικεῖν Ο. 9. γενήσεσθε, ᾧ. τὰ (before δέοντα) om. L. 


8175. 5. εἵνεκα: see note on§120%. M.T. 447, with footnote). On the other 


notov δύναμιν δείξας, by making a 
wy of force in their neighbourhood, 
a Ding near enough to Thebes to 
ιν 5 δ της there alarming. 


t; as he .. aeaeee 
ers Tivos ἕνεκα; 
; 176. I. εἰ μὲν... προαιρησόμεθ᾽ : 


nost vivid form of future supposition 
expresses what the orator wishes 
ake poeepecially prominent by way 
and admonition, though it 
ppe i$ t this is not what he wishes 
what actually occurs. It is an ex- 
ent case of Gildersleeve’s “minatory 
onitory conditions” (see Trans. of 


hand, ἂν μέντοι πεισθῆτ᾽ ἐμοί (7) happens 
to express what he most desires and what 
actually occurs. ‘This example shows the 
mistake of supposing that the indicative 
in protasis expresses more ‘‘ reality ” than 
the subjunctive. Compare the antithesis 
of subjunctive and optative in §§ 147, 148, 
with notes. 

2. δύσκολον, wzpleasant, euphemistic: 
cf. § 189%. 

4. ὡς ἐν. «μερίδι, Looking at them (ws) 
in the light of enemies (M.T. 864): cf. 
8 292° and III. 31, ἐν ὑπηρέτου... μέρει. 

6. μιᾷ γνώμῃ, 2720 consensu. 

7. ἀμφότεροι, Thebans and Philip. 

8. πρὸς τῷ σκοπεῖν... γένησθε, devote 
yourselves to considering: cf. VIII. 11, πρὸς 
Tots πράγμασι γίγνεσθαι. 

9. δόξειν.. διαλύσειν : sc. ἐμέ. 


128 


AHMOZOENOYS 


\ coopera qeny ’ὔ A / 4 , > 
177 καὶ τὸν ἐφεστηκότα κίνδυνον ΤΊ πόλει διαλύσειν. τι οὖν 


ἐπ sh hate Oca on 


\ la ἴω Ν \ / 3 > / »"» 
μὲ δεῖν; πρῶτον “μὲν LOVATO POH ae eee φόβον, εἶτα 


μεταθέσθαι καὶ φοβεῖσθαι πάντας ὑπὲρ Θηβαίων: πολὺ γὰρ 


τῶν δεινῶν εἰσιν ἡμῶν ἐγγυτέρω, καὶ προτέροις αὐτοῖς ἐστιν 


56 κίνδυνος" 


ἔπειτ᾽ ἐξελθόντας ᾿Ελευσϊνάδε τοὺς ἐν ἡλικίᾳ 


x Ν ε 4 ve A ες A > ᾿ς > A σ΄ ͵ 
και τους LTTTEAS δεῖξαι πασιν υμᾶς AVTOVS ἐν τοις omr\ous 


» Ψ A 5 , las Ν ε ΄ > 5 ¥ 
ὄντας, ἵνα Tots ἐν Θήβαις φρονοῦσι Ta ὑμέτερ᾽ ἐξ ἴσου 
γένηται τὸ παρρησιάζεσθαι περὶ τῶν δικαίων, ἰδοῦσιν ὅτι, 


ὥσπερ τοῖς πωλοῦσι Φιλίππῳ τὴν πατρίδα πάρεσθ᾽ ἡ βοη-. 


4 4, 3 3 , ν ~ e \ ἴω 5 / 
10 θήσουσα δύναμις ἐν ᾿᾿ξλατείᾳ, οὕτω τοῖς UTEP τῆς ἐλευθερίας 


3 S72 5 3 5 Ἁ 
Ι 178 O€T ἐαν TLS ET αὐτου 


10. τῇ πόλει κίνδυνον B. 


P 8 177. 1. τί οὖν φημι; δεῖν πρῶτον vulg. 2. 
4 ® (yp), Ar; ὑμῶν V6; om. L, vulg. 


5. 'Enevolvade 2; ᾿Ελευσῖναδε 1... 


, (corr. from ὑμ- ὃ). 8. 
and μεταθέσθαι (3). ἰδοῦσιν Σ, L, V6; 
9. παρέστη ἡ A2. Il. 
§ 178. 1. κελεύω O (only in mg.). 


βοηθήσητε D3 om. L. 12: 


ἀγωνίζεσθαι βουλομένοις ὑπάρχεθ᾽ ὑμεῖς ἕτοιμοι καὶ βοηθή- 
ἢ μετὰ ταῦτα χειροτονῆσαι κελεύω 
δέκα πρέσβεις, καὶ ποιῆσαι τούτους ; κυρίους ) μετὰ τῶν 


δεῖν om. V6. 4. ἡμῶν Σ, 
ἐστιν Σ, ᾧ (yp); ἐσθ᾽ Ar; om. L, vulg. 
6. ἡμᾶς Az. 7. ἡμέτερα At, = 


παρρησιάζεσθαι Z, -ac by corr. from ε (9), as in ἐπανεῖναι (2) 


εἰδόσιν vulg.; eldotow Ar, Y, ®. 
ἐάν 2, L; ἄν vulg. 


2. κατὰ τῶν V6. 


 ᾿ 10. τὸν... τῇ πόλει: for this order of 
words see 88 190”, 197°, 2207; VIII. 21, 
XXI. 63, XXV. 40; and for the common 
order §§ 179°, 1884. See West., who 
notices ‘‘die so passend gewahlten Com- 
posita,” ἐφ-εστηκότα and δια-λύσειν. 

8 177. 3. μεταθέσθαι, Zo turn about, 
explained by φοβεῖσθαι ὑπὲρ Θηβαίων. 

4. ἡμῶν and ἐστιν are omitted by 
West. and BIl., though they are found 
in =. They are not needed. 

5. ᾿ὈἘἨλευσῖνάδε, to the plain of 
Eleusis, ‘‘ but no further, lest a friendly 
demonstration should pass for a menace 
| at Thebes” (Simcox). See note on 
4 8 178°. This was a convenient place 
‘| for the army to encamp, and they would 
be within an easy march of Thebes. The 
ua mountain road to Thebes by Phyle was 
4 more direct, but rougher and with no 
Ἢ good camping place.—rods ἐν ἡλικίᾳ: 
nf ; this term properly included all citizens 
$ between 18 and 60: see Arist. Pol. Ath. 


=e 


42, 4—6 and 34—37. But those between | 
18 and 20 always remained at home as 
φρουροί; while those between 50 and 60 
were not regularly called into service 
and served as διαιτηταί, or public arbiters 
(Arist. Pol. Ath. 53, 20—37). Here the 
1000 ἱππεῖς are excluded from οἱ ἐν ἡλικίᾳ. 
See also Lycurg. 39: αἱ δ᾽ ἐλπίδες τῆς 
σωτηρίας τῷ δήμῳ ἐν τοῖς ὑπὲρ πεντήκοντα 
ἔτη γεγονόσι καθειστήκεσαν, i.e. when the 
news of the defeat at Chaeronea came, 
showing that those above fifty were not 
in the battle. 

7. ἐξ ἴσου, on an equality with Philip’s 
friends. 
g. τοῖς πωλοῦσι, Zo those who would : 
sell (conative): M.T. 25. 2 
11. ὑπάρχεθ᾽ ἕτοιμοι, you are ready 
at hand. 

8178. 2. ποιῆσαι... στρατηγῶν, oe 
to give the envoys (by decree) concurrent | 
authority with the board of generals. 


i 
a 
e 
ye 
ὩΣ 
ἢ 


TIEP! TOY ZTEPANOY 


129 


στρατηγῶν καὶ Tov πότε δεῖ βαδίζειν ἐκεῖσε καὶ τῆς ἐξόδου. 
ἐπειδὰν δ᾽ ἔλθωσιν οἱ πρέσβεις εἰς Θήβας, πῶς χρήσασθαι 


ψε 4 . aA "4 la) 
τῷ πράγματι παραινῷ ; τούτῳ πάνυ μοι προσέχετε TOV νοῦν. 5 


μὴ δεῖσθαι Θηβαίων μηδὲν (αἰσχρὸς γὰρ ὁ καιρὸς), ἀλλ᾽ 


΄ 


| παραινῶ" πάνυ vulg. 
L, F, Φ, O; δεῖσθε vulg. i 
᾿ ἐπαγγείλασθε vulg. 
8. ἐσχάτοις 2, L; ἐσχ. κινδύνοις vulg. 
᾿ ἐκείνων F, B'. 


10. βουλώμεθα 2. σχήματος At. 


3. δεῖ βαδίζειν ἐκεῖσε X, L, Ar; ἐκ. δεῖ Bad. O; δεῖ ἐκ. Bad. vulg. 4. 
Σ,1,, Ar; χρήσεσθαι F, O; χρήσεσθε vulg. 
προσέσχετε (σ erased) 2. 6. 
ἐπαγγέλλεσθαι Σ, L, F, ®; ἐπαγγέλλεσθε Ar; 
av x, L; ἐὰν vulg. 


ἐπαγγέλλεσθαι βοηθήσειν av κελεύωσιν, ὡς ἐκείνων ὄντων 
ἐν τοῖς ἐσχάτοις, ἡμῶν δ᾽ ἄμεινον ἢ ᾿κεῖνοι προορωμένων" 
ἵν ἐὰν ΠΝ δέξωνται ταῦτα καὶ πεισθῶσιν ἡμῖν, καὶ ἃ 
58 βουλόμεθ᾽ ὦμεν διῳκημένοι καὶ μετὰ προσχήματος ἀξίου 
᾿ τῆς πόλεως ταῦτα πράξωμεν, ἂν δ᾽ ἄρα μὴ συμβῇ κατατυχεῖν, 


χρήσασθαι 
5. παραινώ' τούτῳ Σ,1,, B, V6; τούτῳ 
δεῖσθαι Σ (w. + over αἰ), 


ἐκείνων μὲν ΑἹ; ἐκειν ὄντων 1,. 


κεῖνοι Σ, 1.1, ®; ἐκεῖνοι Ar, B®; κείνων L?; 
_ τὸ μέλλον before προορωμένων L, vulg.; om. 2; after προορ. Σ (yp). 


iI. . ay 2, L;' ἐὰν vulg. κατὰ 


3. πότε.. ἐκεῖσε; this question is made 
a genitive with τοῦ. The subject of 
βαδίζειν is ὑμᾶς, the Athenian _ army 
(West. makes it rpécBers). The embassy 
_ probably departed for Thebes at once, so 
__asto lose no timein securing the confidence 
_ of the Thebans; but the army could not 
march further than Eleusis until it was 
nvited by Thebes to cross her frontier. 
his was done in due time (§ 2151), after 
gotiations at Thebes (§§ 211—214). 
4 Ὁ facilitate this movement when the 
Β΄ ὐοὺς should come, the people were 

sked to empower the embassy at Thebes, 
n | concurrence with the generals at 


tte mir ch itself (τῆς ἐξόδου). 
shee τῷ πράγματι, to manage 


ὧδ τούτῳ.. νοῦν : ἡ special call for 
close attention was made to excite the 

ence with the expectation of hearing 
Ἰαΐ the embassy was to ask of the 
yans, and to impress them the more 
{ 16 unexpected answer, μὴ δεῖσθαι 
wy μηδέν. It was indeed δὴ un- 
of thing for an embassy to be 
a semi-hostile state in such an 


> 


ency, with no demands or even 


requests, but with an unconditional offer 
of military help whenever it might be 
asked for. Aeschines does not fail to mis- 
represent this noble act of Demosthenes, 
and to criticise the course of the embassy : 
see III. 145, τὸ βουλευτήριον τὸ τῆς πόλεως 
καὶ τὴν δημοκρατίαν ἄρδην ἔλαθεν ὑφελό- 
μενος, καὶ μετήνεγκεν εἰς Θήβας εἰς τὴν 
Καδμείαν. 

8. ἡμῶν... .-προορωμένων (also with ws), 
on the ground that we foresee (the course 
of events) better than they (τὸ μέλλον is 
omitted with 2): cf. τὸ μὴ δύνασθαι 
προορᾶν, Plat. Theaet. 166 a. 

ἵν᾽, ὦμεν διῳκημένοι, chat we may 
(in that case) have accomplished what we 
wish: the perfect subjunctive here and in 
l. 13 (ἢ πεπραγμένον) expresses future- 
perfect time, in contrast to the simple 
future time of πράξωμεν and ἐγκαλῶσιν 
(M.T. 103). ; 

το. προσχήματος, ground of action : 
πρόσχημα is what appears on the outside, 
which may be either mere show or (as 
here) an honest exhibition of the truth. 
Cf. the double meaning of πρόφασις, 
ground of action or pretext; and see 
πρόθυρα and σχῆμα in Plat. Rep. 365 c. 

11. κατατυχεῖν, 70 succeed (= ἐπιτυχεῖν, 
Hesych.), acc. to Β]., is not elsewhere 


9 


130 AHMOZOENOY2 


ἐκεῖνοι μὲν αὑτοῖς ἐγκαλῶσιν ἂν TL νῦν ἐξαμαρτάνωσιν, ἡ ἡμῖν 
δὲ μηδὲν αἰσχρὸν μηδὲ ταπεινὸν ἢ πεπραγμένον." 
179° Ταῦτα καὶ παραπλήσια τούτοις εἰπὼν κατέβην. 
παινεσάντων δὲ πάντων καὶ οὐδενὸς εἰπόντος ἐναντίον οὐδὲν, 
οὐκ εἶπον μὲν ταῦτα οὐκ ἔγραψα δὲ, οὐδ᾽ ἔγραψα μὲν οὐκ 
ἐπρέσβευσα δὲ, οὐδ᾽ ἐπρέσβευσα μὲν οὐκ ἔπεισα δὲ Θηβαίους, 
5 ἀλλ᾽ ἀπὸ τῆς ἀρχῆς ἄχρι τῆς τελευτῆς διεξῆλθον, καὶ ἔδωκ᾽ 
ἐμαυτὸν ὑμῖν ἁπλῶς εἰς τοὺς περιεστηκότας τῇ πόλει κινδύ- 
νους. καί μοι φέρε τὸ MA Ente TO TOTE γενόμενον. 


Καίτοι τίνα Bowne. σὲ, Αἰσχίνη, καὶ τίνα ἐμαυτὸν ἐκείνην 


συνε- 


180 


β 
| 
; 
, 


τυχὴν A2, F; καὶ κατατυχεῖν B (y 


p)3 κατατύχην I} (w. yp ἀτυχεῖν above), Bi; 


ἐάν V6. ἐξαμαρτάνωσιν Σ, L; 


μηδὲ ταπεινὸν om. Νό. 


διὰ πάντων om. Σ΄. 6. ὑμῖν 


κατατύυχειν L?, 12. αὑτοῖς Σ, L; ἑαυτοῖς vulg. 
ἐξαμάρτωσιν vulg. ὑμῖν A2. vif 
- § 179. 5. ἀρχῆς διὰ πάντων L, vulg.; 
om. AI. 

§180. τ. σὲ L; ce vulg. ὦ Αἰσχ- ΑἹ. 


, found in classic writers; but κατατυγχά- 
νειν occurs in Arist. Pol. Iv. (VI.) 11, 1, 
in a similar sense. 

12. αὑτοῖς ἐγκαλῶσιν, may have them- 
selves to blame. 

13. ἢ πεπραγμένον : see note on ]. 9. 

8 179. 1. καὶ παραπλήσια: we 
have here only a single passage of what 
must have been one of the most eloquent 
speeches of Demosthenes. 

3. οὐκ εἶπον μὲν... Θηβαίους : a most 
famous example of climax (κλῖμαξ, ladder), 
in which the antitheses of μέν and δέ give 
a wonderful effect. Each of the three 
leading negatives (οὐκ, οὐδ᾽, οὐδ᾽ intro- 
duces a pair of clauses of which the 
second is negative, and which as a whole 
it negatives. Thus the first οὐκ negatives 
the compound idea, 7 spoke, but proposed 
no measures ; then the positive conclusion 
thus attained, / dzd propose measures, is 
taken as an assumption in the next step. 
Without the help of μέν and δέ the mixture 
of negatives would have made hopeless 
confusion. Quintilian (Ix. 3, 55) thus 
translates the passage, skilfully using 
quidem for μέν and sed for δέ: non enim 
dixt quidem sed non scripst, nec scripst 
quidem sed non obit legationem, nec obti 
quidem sed non persuast Thebants. 


6. ἁπλῶς, without reserve, absolutely. 
-τοὺς.. «κινδύνους : for the order see note 
on § 17619. 

τὸ Wyiopa...yevopevov: cf. Aesch. 
III. 25, πρὶν ἢ τὸν ᾿Ηγήμονος νόμον γενέσθαι, 
and II. 160, ποῖον (νόμον) γενέσθαι κωλύσας. 

§ 180. While the clerk is preparing 
to read the decree, the orator interrupts 
his argument and (as frequently happens 
in such cases) amuses the audience by a 
few jokes at his opponent’s expense. 

1. τίνα βούλει.. θῶ ; (M.T. 287), whom — 
will you that I shall suppose you, and — 
whom myself, to have been on that day? 
εἶναι is imperfect infinitive (Ξε ἦσθα) with 
θῶ, which in this sense takes the infinitive ~ 
of indirect discourse: cf. Aesch. 111. 163, 
βούλει σε θῶ φοβηθῆναι; We see from 
Plat. Rep. 372 E, εἰ βούλεσθε καὶ φλεγμαί- 
νουσαν πόλιν θεωρήσωμεν, that βούλει or | 
βούλεσθε was the principal verb in this 
construction, and not parenthetical (like 
κελεύετε in εἴπω κελεύετε Kal οὐκ ὀργιεῖσθε; 
Dem. 1x. 46), though it may have been 
the reverse when such expressions were 
first used. ‘We have, in fact, a parataxis 
of two independent sentences, not yet 
quite developed into a leading and a 
dependent sentence, like cave /facias, 
visne hoc videamus ? etc. So soon as the — 


_ 
ς. 

Ρ 

φ 


ΠΕΡῚ TOY ΣΤΕΦΑΝΟῪ 131 


\ ε 4 5 “ ὼ 
τὴν ἡμέραν εἶναι θῶ; βούλει ἐμαυτὸν μὲν, ὃν ἂν σὺ λοιδο- 
΄ \ ὃ , ΄ , τον »͵ῷῳ 
ρούμενος καὶ διασύρων καλέσαις, Βάτταλον, σὲ δὲ μηδ᾽ ἥρω 
μον ie : > Ν ἴω lan κι 
τὸν τυχόντα, ἀλλὰ τούτων τινὰ τῶν ἀπὸ τῆς σκηνῆς, Κρε- 
/ x , xX “ al 
σφόντην ἢ Κρέοντα ἢ ὃν ἐν Κολλυτῷ ποτ᾽ Οἰνόμαον κακῶς 
> ὔ / / lon 
ἐπέτριψας ; τότε τοίνυν κατ᾽ ἐκεῖνον TOV καιρὸν ὁ Παιανιεὺς 
3 Ν , 3 Ἕ la ἴω 
ἐγὼ Βάτταλος Οἰνομάου τοῦ Κοθωκίδου σοῦ πλείονος ἀξιος 


ΡΨ 


> 


a 


<. 


x ye kee 2 / 
ὧν ἐφάνην TH πατρίδι. 


.2. λυδορούμενος (οι over v) =. 2 
_ by corr.) and Βάταλος L; Bar. vulg. 
ἥροα Ο; ἥρω At. 5. 


vulg., om. 2}. 7. ἐγὼ om. Az. 


language allowed a conjunction to connect 
‘the subjunctive to βούλει (or θέλει), we 
find, for example, θέλετε εἴπω; developed 
into θέλετε ἵνα εἴπω; as in the New 
Testament: from. this comes the modern 
θέλετε νὰ εἴπω; and perhaps the common 
future θὰ (Ξεθέλετε va?) εἴπω, 7 shall 
Say. 

2. βούλει ἐμαυτὸν : sc. θῶ εἶναι ;---ὃν 


τς καλέσαις, i.e. as you would call me, 
ΝΠ εἰς. 


3. Βάτταλον: this nickname of De- 
mosthenes, which the orator said was 
given him by his nurse (Aesch. I. 126), 


probably referred to his lean and sickly 


look in childhood and youth; and the 
attempts of Aeschines to give it an 
opprobrious or even obscene meaning 
_ {as in I. 131) are probably mere jibes. 
See Plut. Dem. 4, which gives the most 
explicit account.—p8’ ἥρω τὸν τυχόντα, 
‘not even a hero of the common kind: see 
note on ὧν ἔτυχεν, § 130%. « 

4. ἀλλὰ... σκηνῆς, but one of those 
(great) heroes of the stage—Kperpédvrny, 
in the Cresphontes of Euripides, in which 
Merope has the chief part: cf. Arist. Eth. 
Πα 17, 

5 Κρέοντα: Aeschines played Creon 
_ in the Antigone of Sophocles as τριταγω- 
νιστής: see XIX. 247, ἐν ἅπασι τοῖς δράμασι 
Tots τραγικοῖς ἐξαίρετόν ἐστιν ὥσπερ γέρας 
τοῖς τριταγωνισταῖς τὸ τοὺς τυράννους καὶ 


᾿ τοὺς τὰ σκῆπτρα ἔχοντας εἰσιέναι.---Οἰνό- 


σὺ μέν γε οὐδὲν οὐδαμοῦ χρήσιμος 


Βάτταλον Σ (but Βάταλος |. 7); Βάταλον (rr 


ἥρωα (a erased) Σ; ἥρω (a over w) L; 


κακὸς κακῶς A2; καὶ κακῶς Y ; ὑποκρινόμενος (after κακῶς) 
Βάτταλος, see l. 3. 8. 


σοι (for σὺ) At. 


μαον : 1.6. this part in the Oenomaus of 
Sophocles, which represented the chariot- 
race of Pelops and Oenomaus, by which 
Pelops won the hand of Hippodameia. 
This was the subject of one of the pedi- 
ment-groups of the temple of Zeus at 
Olympia.—kakas ἐπέτριψας, you wretch- 
edly murdered (as we say of a bad actor): 
the object ὃν may be understood of either 
Oenomaus himself or the part. The 
anonymous life of Aeschines (7) gives a 
story, told by Demochares, a nephew of 


Demosthenes, that Aeschines fell on the 


stage in acting this part: ὑποκρινόμενον 
Οἰνόμαον διώκοντα Πέλοπα αἰσχρῶς πεσεῖν. 
As Oenomaus was finally killed, there 
is probably a double meaning in κακῶς 
émrérpryas. See Hor. Sat. I. 10, 36: 
turgidus Alpinus zzgaw/at dum Memnona, 
with Dissen’s note, ‘“‘cuius caedem 1116 
miseris versiculis narravit.” In the deme 
of Collytus dramas were performed at the 
Lesser (or country) Dionysia: ἐκ Κολλυτῴῷ 
is an additional slur on the tragic perform- 
ance of Aeschines. See Aesch. I. 157, 
πρώην ἐν τοῖς κατ᾽ ἀγροὺς Διονυσίοις κω- 
μῳδῶν ὄντων ἐν ολλυτῷ. See ᾿Αρουραῖος 
Οἰνόμαος, ὃ 242°. 

6. τότε refers generally to time; κατ᾽ 
ἐκεῖνον τὸν καιρὸν to a critical moment. 

7. Οἰνομάου τοῦ Κοθωκίδου : Aeschi- 
nes was of the deme Κοθωκίδαι. The 
order is chiastic with Παιανιεὺς Βάτταλος. 


g—2 


Io 


181 


182 


183 


5 


132 AHMOZSOENOYS 


ἘΝ 


3 Ν Ν / 3 4 ~ \ 53 \ &. 2 
ἦσθα: ἐγὼ δὲ πάνθ᾽ ὅσα προσῆκε τὸν ἀγαθὸν πολίτην 


ἔπραττον. λέγε τὸ ψήφισμά μοι. 
ΨΉΦΙΣΜΑ ΔΗΜΟΣΘΕΝΟΥ͂Σ. 


[Emi ἄρχοντος Ναυσικλέους, φυλῆς πρυτανευούσης Αἰαντίδος, 
Ξ A of 8. τ᾿ ΤῸ ": , NF 
σκιροφοριῶνος ἕκτῃ ἐπὶ δέκα, Δημοσθένης Δημοσθένους 1]αιανιεὺς 
5 e / a 
εἶπεν, ἐπειδὴ Φίλιππος ὁ Μακεδόνων βασιλεὺς ἔν Te τῷ παρελη- 28 
/ / / 7 \ a 
λυθότι χρόνῳ παραβαίνων φαίνεται Tas γεγενημένας αὐτῷ συνθήκας 
3 a lal > / 
πρὸς Tov ᾿Αθηναίων δῆμον περὶ τῆς εἰρήνης, ὑπεριδὼν τοὺς ὅρκους 
\ \ \ n AL C7. / 3 / \ / 
Kal Ta Tapa πᾶσι τοῖς “ἄλλησι νομιζόμενα εἶναι δίκαια, Kal πόλεις 
παραιρεῖται οὐδὲν αὑτῷ προσηκούσας, τινὰς δὲ καὶ ᾿Αθηναίων 
bd / / >Q\ A ς ἣ a / 
οὔσας δοριαλώτους πεποίηκεν οὐδὲν προαδικηθεὶς ὑπὸ τοῦ δήμου 
an? 4 a / \ \ t a / 
τοῦ ᾿Αθηναίων, ἔν τε τῷ παρόντι ἐπὶ πολὺ προάγει τῇ. τε Bia Kal 
(aie / A \ \ ς a , “Ὁ \ > f, -_A 
τῇ ὠμότητι" καὶ yap EXddnvidas πόλεις ἃς μὲν ἐμφρούρους Totet 
x \ / OE: \ \ \ > / 
Kal τὰς πολιτείας καταλύει, τινὰς δὲ καὶ ἐξανδραποδιζόμενος 
/ 
κατασκάπτει, εἰς ἐνίας δὲ καὶ ἀντὶ “Ελλήνων βαρβάρους κατοικίζει. 
> \ x ig \ \ Ἂν 4 > or > \ > / an BA 
ἐπὶ τὰ ἱερὰ καὶ τοὺς τάφους ἐπάγων, οὐδὲν ἀλλότριον ποιῶν οὔτε 
rn ἴω / na / a a! ΓΙ al / 
τῆς ἑαυτοῦ πατρίδος οὔτε τοῦ τρόπου, καὶ TH νῦν αὐτῷ παρούσῃ 
/ a fal 
τύχῃ κατακόρως χρώμενος, ἐπιλελησμένος ἑαυτοῦ OTL EK μικροῦ 
\ an ἐξ / “ ts 
καὶ τοῦ τυχόντος γέγονεν ἀνελπίστως μέγας. καὶ ἕως μὲν πόλεις 
Cay I aN / \ PENTA ς ἧς 
ἑώρα παραιρούμενον αὐτὸν βαρβάρους καὶ ἰδίας, ὑπελάμβανεν 
” 3 ς “ te | / N > « N an 
ἔλαττον εἶναι ὁ δῆμος ὁ ᾿Αθηναίων τὸ εἰς αὑτὸν πλημμελεῖσθαι" 
n la) Ὶ / \ \ 
νῦν δὲ ὁρῶν ᾿Ελληνίδας πόλεις τὰς μὲν ὑβριζομένας, τὰς δὲ ava- 
στάτους γιγνομένας, δεινὸν ἡγεῖται εἶναι καὶ ἀνάξιον τῆς τῶν 
/ / \ a \ “ / 
προγόνων δόξης τὸ περιορᾶν τοὺς “EXAnvas καταδουλουμένους. 


184 διὸ δεδόχθαι τῇ βουλῇ καὶ τῷ δήμῳ τῷ ᾿Αθηναίων, εὐξαμένους καὶ 


4 “ an ¢, n 7 ΄΄ς 
θύσαντας τοῖς θεοῖς καὶ ἥρωσι τοῖς κατέχουσι τὴν πόλιν καὶ τὴν 


9. δ᾽ ἅπαντα Al. 


ἃ (for ὅσα) Ar. 10. ἔπραττον om. Y. po. 2, L, Ar; 
om. vulg. . 


§§ 181—187 contain the spurious “‘de- 
cree of Demosthenes.” Its date, the 16th 
of Scirophorion (June or July), brought 
hopeless confusion into the chronology of 
the campaign before Chaeronea. See 
Clinton, Fast. Hellen. 11. under 338 B.c., 
and his attempt to reconcile impossible 
dates in Appendix xvi. The real decree 
was passed in the autumn or early winter 
of 339—338 B.C., the year of the Archon 
Lysimachides. The style of the docu- 
ment is a ridiculous parody of that of 


Demosthenes (see ὃ 182), and its length 
was perhaps suggested by the remark of 
Aeschines (11. 100) on another decree of 
Demosthenes, ψήφισμα μακρότερον τῆς 
Ἰλιάδος. Lord Brougham’s remarks on~ 
this document, written of course in full 
faith in its genuineness, are now interest- 
ing. He says (p. 181): ‘*The style of 
this piece is full of dignity, and the diction 
perfectly simple as well as chaste, wit! 

the solemnity of a State paper, but with- 
out the wordiness or technicality.” Ἢ 


290 


SS ως στοὰ 


ΠΕΡῚ TOY 2TEPANOY 133 


͵ 7 ἊΜ a n 

χώραν τὴν ᾿Αθηναίων, καὶ ἐνθυμηθέντας τῆς τῶν προγόνων ἀρετῆς, 
,ὔ \ 7 > a \ fa em / 2 / 

διότι περὶ πλείονος ἐποιοῦντο τὴν τῶν ᾿ὥλλήνων ἐλευθερίαν διατη- 
nan ΕΥ \ 8 / (ὃ ὃ / la θέ ’ \ θ ͵7 

ρεῖν ἢ τὴν ἰδίαν πατρίδα, διακοσίας ναῦς καθέλκειν εἰς τὴν θάλατταν 

, a Ν a 

Kal τὸν ναύαρχον ἀναπλεῖν ἐντὸς Πυλῶν, καὶ τὸν στρατηγὸν Kal 
Ἂ vf \ \ \ \ ς \ / 3 res 

Tov ἵππαρχον Tas πεζὰς Kai Tas ἱππικὰς δυνάμεις ᾿᾿λευσϊνάδε 

7 Ἦν 
ἐξάγειν, πέμψαι δὲ καὶ πρέσβεις πρὸς τοὺς ἄλλους “EXAHvas, 
n \ 3 

πρῶτον δὲ πάντων πρὸς Θηβαίους διὰ τὸ ἐγγυτάτω εἶναι τὸν 

Φώλιππον τῆς ἐκείνων χώρας, παρακαλεῖν δὲ αὐτοὺς μηδὲν κατα- 

πλαγέντας τὸν Φίλιππον ἀντέχεσθαι τῆς ἑαυτῶν καὶ τῆς τῶν 
- P ΄ δ ς a 

ἄλλων ᾿λλήνων ἐλευθερίας, καὶ ὅτι ὁ ᾿Αθηναίων δῆμος, οὐδὲν 

“ / / a / 

μνησικακῶν εἴ TL πρότερον γέγονεν ἀλλότριον ταῖς πόλεσι πρὸς 

ἀλλήλας, βοηθήσει καὶ δυνάμεσι καὶ χρήμασι καὶ βέλεσι καὶ 

“ 3 v4 ’ al \ \ » / a \ 

ὅπλοις, εἰδὼς OTL αὐτοῖς μὲν πρὸς ἀλλήλους διαμφισβητεῖν περὶ 


τῆς ἡγεμονίας οὖσιν “Ελλησι καλὸν, ὑπὸ δὲ ἀλλοφύλου ἀνθρώπου. 


» θ Ν n € / 5 A 4 > / 3 \ an 
αρχεσ αν καὶ TNS ἡγεμονυῶς αποστερείσσαι ἀνάξιον ELVaL KAL Τῆς 


τῶν Ἑλλήνων δόξης καὶ THs τῶν προγόνων ἀρετῆς. ἔτι δὲ οὐδὲ 


ἀλλότριον ἡγεῖται εἶναι ὁ ᾿Αθηναίων δῆμος τὸν Θηβαίων δῆμον 
οὔτε τῇ συγγενείᾳ οὔτε τῷ ὁμοφύλῳ. ἀναμιμνήσκεται δὲ καὶ τὰς 
τῶν προγόνων τῶν ἑαυτοῦ εἰς τοὺς Θηβαίων προγόνους εὐεργεσίας" 
καὶ γὰρ τοὺς Ἡρακλέους παῖδας ἀποστερουμένους ὑπὸ IleXotrov- 
νησίων τῆς πατρῴας ἀρχῆς κατήγαγον, τοῖς ὅπλοις κρατήσαντες 
τοὺς ἀντιβαίνειν πειρωμένους τοῖς “Ηρακλέους ἐκγόνοις, καὶ τὸν 
Οἰδίπουν καὶ τοὺς μετ᾽ ἐκείνου ἐκπεσόντας ὑπεδεξάμεθα, καὶ ἕτερα 
πολλὰ ἡμῖν ὑπάρχει φιλάνθρωπα καὶ ἔνδοξα πρὸς Θηβαίους" 
διόπερ οὐδὲ νῦν ἀποστήσεται ὁ ᾿Αθηναίων δῆμος τῶν Θηβαίοις τε 
καὶ τοῖς ἄλλοις “λλησι συμφερόντων. συνθέσθαι δὲ πρὸς αὐτοὺς 
συμμαχίαν καὶ ἐπιγαμίαν ποιήσασθαι καὶ ὅρκους δοῦναι καὶ λαβεῖν. 
πρέσβεις Δημοσθένης Δημοσθένους Ἰ]αιανιεὺς, “Ὑπερείδης Κλεάν- 
Spov Σφήττιος, Μνησιθείδης ᾿Αντιφάνους Φρεάρριος, Δημοκράτης 
Σωφίλου Φλυεὺς, Κάλλαισχρος Διοτίμου Κοθωκίδης.] 


» 


Αὕτη τῶν περὶ Θήβας ἐγίγνετο πραγμάτων ἀρχὴ καὶ 


κατάστασις πρώτη, τὰ πρὸ τούτων͵ εἰς ἔχθραν καὶ μῖσος καὶ 


8 188. I. των γ΄ Φ: at 2, L, Ar; ἐγένετο vulg. 


8 188. 1. Αὕτη.. πρώτη, this was the business in coming to a settlement. 


| the first step taken and the first settlement See Weil’s note: “κατάστασις est ici le 


effected in our relations with Thebes: contraire de rapaxy.” Cf. XX. 11, ἐπειδὴ 
ἐγίγνετο, if we take this rather than the δ᾽ ἡ πόλις εἰς ἕν ἦλθε Kal τὰ πράγματ᾽ ἐκεῖνα 
Vulg. ἐγένετο, refers to the progress of δ κατέστη (after the rule of the Thirty), 


185 


αι 


186 


187 


ϑ 


ra ss lee ee eS OUT 


Sec 


189 


BB - TAQayPOAe TS” 


134 


ἀπιστίαν τῶν πόλεων ὑπηγμένων ὑπὸ τούτων. 
ψήφισμα τὸν τότε τῇ πόλει περιστάντα κίνδυνον παρελθεῖν 
|) ἣν μὲν τοίνυν τοῦ δικαίου) πολίτου 
τότε δεῖξαι πᾶσιν, εἴ τι τούτων εἶχεν ἄμεινον, μὴ νῦν 
ἐπιτιμᾶν. ] ὁ γὰρ σύμβουλος καὶ O συκοφάντης, οὐδὲ τῶν 
ἄλλων οὐδὲν ἐοικότες, ἐν τούτῳ πλεῖστον ἀλλήλων διαφέ.- 
βουσιν: ὁ μέν γε πρὸ τῶν πραγμάτων γνώμην ἀποφαίνεται, 
“Kal δίδωσιν ἑαυτὸν ὑπεύθυνον τοῖς πεισθεῖσι, τῇ τύχῃ, τῷ 


> / ν ΄, 
ἐποίησεν ὥσπερ νέφος. | 


4. τὸν τότε περιστάντα τῇ πόλει B. 


δ 189. 1. οὐδὲ Σ, L (yp); οὐδενὶ Σ (yp), Ar; ἐν οὐδενὶ L, vulg. 2. οὐδὲν 
(before ἐοικότε5) vulg., om. Ο ; οὐδενί or ovdev Σ᾽ (now nearly obliterated). 3. pe 
γε, ih μὲν γὰρ!,, vulg. 4. ἑαυτὸν 2, L, At; αὑτὸν vulg. τῷ καιρῷ Σ, L; 


τοῖς καιροῖς vulg. 


ΔΗΛΛΟΣΘΕΝΟΥᾺΙ͂ 


Cf 


τοῦτο τὸ: 


6. μὴ τοίνυν Ατ. 


and Ar. Ran. 1003, ἡνίκ᾽ ἂν τὸ πνεῦμα 
λεῖον καὶ καθεστηκὸς λάβῃς. Hermogenes, 
περὶ ἰδεῶν I. 9 (III. p. 247 W.), quotes 
this passage and ὃ 2994, οὐ λίθοις ἐτείχισα 
K.T.A., as instances of ἀπόστασις and ἀναί- 
peots, with the remark, ὅλως δὲ τὰ ἀσυνδέ- 
τως εἰσαγόμενα, εἰ μακρὰ εἴη τὰ κῶλα, ποιεῖ 
λαμπρὸν τὸν λόγον, ταῖς ἐννοίαις κἂν ἀκ- 
μαῖος 7. 

4. παρελθεῖν ὥσπερ νέφος, Zo pass by 
like a cloud, or to vanish like a passing 
cloud. The simplicity of this simile was 
much admired by the Greek rhetoricians, 
who quote it nine times (see Spengel’s 
index). See Longinus on the Sublime, 39, 
4: ὑψηλόν γε τοῦτο δοκεῖ νόημα, καὶ ἔστι 
τῷ ὄντι θαυμάσιον, ὃ τῷ ψηφίσματι ὁ Δη- 
μοσθένης ἐπιφέρει... ἀλλ᾽ αὐτῆς τῆς διανοίας 
οὐκ ἔλαττον τῇ ἁρμονίᾳ πεφώνηται. He 
then discourses on the fatal effect which 
would result from a change in the order 
of the words, or from the omission or 
addition of a single syllable (as ὡς νέφος 
or ὥσπερ εἰ νέφος), though the sense 
would not be changed: τὸ αὐτὸ σημαίνει, 
οὐ τὸ αὐτὸ δὲ ἔτι σημαίνει. Hermogenes 
περὶ ἰδεῶν (111. p. 367 W.) censures the 
introduction of τὰ πρὸ τούτων... ὑπὸ τούτων 
between this clause and the preceding 
αὕτη...πρώτη, which, he says, διέκοψε καὶ 
ἧττον ἐποίησεν αὐτὸν (i.e. τὸν λόγον) φανῆ- 
ναι λαμπρόν. 

6. τούτων, i.e. than my measures. 

In the last sentence of § 188, the orator 


suddenly breaks off his narrative of the 
negotiation with Thebes, and digresses 
into a most eloquent defence of the policy 
of Athens in resisting Philip, and of his 
own conduct as her responsible leader. 
See note on 88 160—226. 

8 189. 1. σύμβουλος, statesman. 
συκοφάντης: no modern word, least of — 
all the English sycophant, gives the full 
meaning of this expressive term, though 
the same combination of malicious in- 
former, dirty pettifogger, common slan- 
derer and backbiter, is unhappily still to 
be seen. Plutarch (Dem. 14) quotes a — 
reply of Demosthenes to the people when — 
they urged him to undertake a certain 
prosecution : ὑμεῖς ἐμοὶ...συμβούλῳ -mev — 
κἂν μὴ θέλητε χρήσεσθε, συκοφάντῃ δὲ — 
οὐδ᾽ ἐὰν θέλητε. The 4vord must have — 
referred originally to, the petty form of — 
prosecution for violation of the revenue | 
laws known as φάσις, in which half of 
the penalty went to the informer. See 
Ar. Eq. 300: καί σε paivw τοῖς πρυτά- — 
veow ἀδεκατεύτους τῶν θεῶν ipas ἔχοντα 
κοιλίας. The relation of the word ἴὸ 
σῦκον is very doubtful. Perhaps the in- 
significance of a fig as the basis of a 
process at law may have suggested cuxo- 
φάντης ἃ5 -- σῦκα φαίνων : see φήνας κυνίδιον — 
Σεριφίων, Ar. Ach. 542. Ἁ 

4. ὑπεύθυνον, responsible in the ful 
Attic sense, e.g. liable to the εὔθυναι. 
to the γραφὴ παρανόμων. 


ΠΕΡῚ: TOY 2TEPANOY 


135 


ἴω “ vo ε Ν / ε ον ix » / A 
καιρῷ, τῷ βουλομένῳ: ὁ δὲ σιγήσας ἡνίκ᾽ ἔδει λέγειν, ἄν 5 
΄ - A ΄ὕ 5 \ Ἃ ® Ψ 
τι δύσκολον συμβῇῃ. τοῦτο βασκαίνει. ὴν μεν ον, οπέρ 190 
εἶπον, ἐκεῖνος ὁ καιρὸς τοῦ γε φροντίζοντος ἀνδρὸς τῆς 
/ εἷ “~ , ‘6 > N \ i ε \ 
πόλεως καὶ TOV δικαίων λόγων: ἐγὼ δὲ τοσαύτην ὑπερβολὴν 
lal ν “Δ ἴω »» lay , , x ν 
ποιοῦμαι ὥστε, ἂν νῦν ἔχῃ τις δεῖξαί τι βέλτιον, ἢ ὅλως 
Ἂν »¥ a Re \ fe Cae / 3 ΖΝ ε a 
εἴ TL ἀλλ᾽ ἐνῆν πλὴν ὧν ἐγὼ προειλόμην, ἀδικεῖν ὁμολογῶ. 5 
im εἰ yap ἔσθ᾽ ὁ τι τις νῦν ἑόρακεν, ὃ συνήνεγκεν ἂν τότε 
Ν gee 5 id π᾿ 3 \ \ “~ 3 \ | ta 
πραχθὲν, τοῦτ᾽ ἐγώ φημι δεῖν ἐμὲ μὴ λαθεῖν. εἰ δὲ μήτ 
» > a 
᾿ς ἔστι μήτ᾽ HV μήτ᾽ ἂν εἰπεῖν ἔχοι μηδεὶς μηδέπω καὶ τήμερον, 
τί τὸν σύμβουλον ἐχρὴν ποιεῖν; οὐ τῶν φαινομένων καὶ 
as). 7 \ ,ὕ CNUs, A , 3 ,ὕ A 
ἐνόντων τὰ κράτιστα ἑλέσθαι ; τουτο τοινυν ἐποίησα, του 191 
᾿ς κήρυκος ἐρωτῶντος, Αἰσχίνη, τίς ἀγορεύειν βούλεται; 
> / > “A Ν la Ψ 5 Ν 
οὐ τίς αἰτιᾶσθαι περὶ τῶν παρεληλυθότων; οὐδὲ 
,ὔ 3 A \ lA 3 » “ 3 9 ’ 
τίς ἐγγυᾶσθαι τὰ μέλλοντ᾽ ἔσεσθαι; σοῦ δ᾽ ἀφώνου 
3 aA 
κατ᾽ ἐκείνους τοὺς χρόνους ἐν ταῖς ἐκκλησίαις καθημένου, 5 


ἐγὼ παριὼν ἔλεγον. ἐπειδὴ δ᾽ οὐ τότε, ἀλλὰ νῦν δεῖξον" 


8 190. 2. τοῦ τε Ατ; τοῦ τότε V6; τοῦ Ο. 4. δεῖξαι ti L; τι δεῖξαι ᾧ ; 
τι οἵη. Ar. ἢ (corr.) ὀλως Σ. Ἐπ Al. Ὁ: Μετ» At, ὃ τὸ ΤΟΣ 2, 
vulg.; 67 ris L; ὅ τις O. ἑώρακεν all Mss., Bk.; ἑόρακεν later edd. (see note on 
8 645). 8. ἔχοι τις A2. 


: 8 191. 1. ἐποίησα ἐγὼ At. 3. αἰτιᾶσθαι DX, L, Ar; αἰτιάσασθαι vulg. 
6. παριὼν At; περιιὼν L; περιων (¢ above) >; παρελθὼν vulg. ἐπεὶ Al. 


6. δύσκολον: cf. ὃ 176.—Backaiver: 7. τοῦτ᾽... δεῖν ἐμὲ μὴ λαθεῖν, 7 say 


Harpocr. ἀντὶ τοῦ αἰτιᾶται καὶ μέμφεται 
καὶ συκοφαντεῖ" Anuood. ἐν τῷ ὑπὲρ Κτη- 
σιφῶντος. 

8 190. 1. ἦν μὲν οὖν resumes the 
thought of the last sentence of § 188. 

2. τοῦ ἀνδρὸς: cf. LVII. 49. For 
the order see note on ἃ 176}, 

3. τῶν δικ. λόγων: with καιρὸς (West., 
Β].), or with φροντίζοντος.---τοσαύτην 
ὑπερβολὴν ποιοῦμαι, i.e. I go so far 
beyond what could be asked of me. 

5. ἐνῆν : used personally with τι ἄλλο: 
cf. σὰ ἐνῆν, § 1934, and ΧΧΙ. 41. So 
ἐνόντων (10): such participles are very often 
personal (M. T. 761).—dv ἐγὼ προειλό- 
μην: cf. § 192°, τὴν προαίρεσίν μου τῆς 
πολιτείας.--- ἀδικεῖν, in its so-called per- 
fect sense (M. T. 27). 

6. τότε πραχθὲν -- εἰ τότ᾽ ἐπράχθη. 


this ought not to have escaped me (at the 
time): δεῖν... λαθεῖν represents ἔδει ἐμὲ 
μὴ λαθεῖν. 

7,8. εἰ δὲ.. τήμερον : for this compound 
protasis with a present, a past, and ἃ 
potential optative united in one suppo- 
sition, see M. T. 509: notice the three 
negatives and the emphatic καὶ in μήτ᾽ 
dv...rhuepov. See § 1τ41.--ακν,ηδέπω καὶ 
τήμερον, sot yet, even at this day. 

9. τῶν φαινομένων kal ἐνόντων, of the 
plans which offered themselves to us and 
were feasible. 

§ 191. 3. τίς... παρεληλυθότων; a 
question to be addressed to a συκοφάντης, 
not to a σύμβουλος (ὃ 189). 

6. οὐ τότε: sc. ἔδειξας.---ἀλλὰ νῦν 
(MPT R584). 


136 ΔΗΛΛΟΣΘΕΝΟῪΣ 


3 \ ’ὔ x / 4 3.5 “ > a “ἡ Ἂς 4, 
εἰπε TLS ἢ λόγος, OVTLY ἐχρὴν εὐπορεῖν, ἢ καιρὸς συμφέρων 
Wet ae a) ΄, va , Yd \ / ΄ A 
ὑπ ἐμοῦ παρελείφθη τῇ πόλει; Tis δὲ συμμαχία, Tis πρᾶξις, 
ἈΠ “ὦ “~ » Se ve] “A / 
ep ἣν μᾶλλον ἔδει μ᾽ ἀγαγεῖν τουτουσί; 
δ... πὰ ἴω 
109. Αλλὰ μὴν τὸ μὲν παρεληλυθὸς ἀεὶ παρὰ πᾶσιν ἀφεῖται, 
καὶ οὐδεὶς περὶ τούτου προτίθησιν οὐδαμοῦ βουλήν" τὸ δὲ 
μέλλον ἢ ἵν τὸ παρὸν τὴν τοῦ συμβούλου. τάξιν ἀπαιτεῖ. τότε 
τοίνυν τὰ μὲν ἤμελλεν, ὡς ἐδόκει, τῶν δεινῶν, τὰ δ᾽ ἤδη 
5 παρῆν, ἐν οἷς τὴν προαίρεσίν μου. σκόπει τῆς πολιτείας, 
μὴ τὰ συμβάντα συκοφάντει. τὸ μὲν γὰρ πέρας ὡς ἂν 
ε ’ὔ “Ὁ if , ε A / dN 
6 δαίμων βουληθῇ πάντων γίγνεται: ἡ δὲ προαίρεσις AUTH 
193 τὴν τοῦ συμβούλου διάνοιαν δηλοῖ. μὴ δὴ τοῦθ᾽ ὡς ἀδίκημ᾽ 
ἐμὸν θῇς, εἰ κρατῆσαι συνέβη Φιλίππῳ τῇ μάχῃ: ἐν γὰρ 
“ας ep NS: Ψ 4 ey 3 3 Ue 3 > ‘ne 3 y 
τῷ θεῷ τὸ τούτου τέλος ἦν, οὐκ ἐμοί. ἀλλ᾽ ὡς οὐχ ἅπαντα 
ν 7 A δι, 9 ΄ \ ey ἘΣ \ ᾽ 
ὁσα ἐνὴν κατ ἀνθρώπινον λογισμὸν εἱλόμην, καὶ δικαίως. 
A Ν > “A » Ν is ε Ά , 
5ταῦτα. καὶ ἐπιμελῶς ἔπραξα καὶ φιλοπόνως ὑπὲρ δύναμιν, 


7. εὐπορεῖν Σ; τα vulg. 8. ἢ τις πρᾶξις Az. 9. μᾶλλον om. Y. 
. § 192. 1. παρ᾽ ἅπασιν Ατ; περὶ πᾶσιν 1,. 2. ὑπὲρ τούτου Νό. προστί- 
θησιν V6. τὸ, τε μέλλον (δε Over Te) Σ. 3. πρᾶξιν Α2. 4: ἤμελλεν MSS. 
6. συμβάντα Σ,1,, B®, Ar; συμβαίνοντα vulg. VE αὕτη Z; αὐτὴ vulg. 

8 193. 2. τῇ μάχῃ Σ, L, F, B (corr.), Ar. 2: τὴν μάχην vulg. 3. οὐδ 


ἐμοί Σ, L; οὐκ ἐν ἐμοί vulg. 


8. τῇ πόλει: often taken with συμφέ- 
ρων (see Bl.); better with παρελείφθη, as 
in ὃ 107!°, ἀπώλετο TH πόλει. 

9. μάλλον, rather than to my own. 

8 192. τ. ἀφεῖται (gnomic), zs dzs- 
missed from consideration. 

3. τὴν..«τάξιν, 1.6. che statesman at 
his post: τάξιν keeps up the military 
figure of § 173. ὅ.---τότε.. παρῆν : appli- 
cation of the general principle to the case 
in hand; τὰ μὲν ἤμελλεν referring to 
Chaeronea and its results, τὰ δ᾽ ἤδη 
παρῆν to Philip’s presence at Elatea. 
Though these are now past, they were 
then future and present. 

5. τὴν... πολιτείας : see note on ὃ 190°. 
προαίρεσις implies the deliberate choice of 
a policy which a statesman should make: 
here and in τὰ συμβάντα συκοφάντει we 
have again the σύμβουλος and the συκο- 
φάντης contrasted. For the precise mean- 


ing of προαίρεσις, see Arist. Eth. 111. 2 
(especially ὃ 17): ἀλλ᾽ apa γε τὸ προβε- 
βουλευμένον (sc. τὸ προαιρετόν); ἣ γὰρ 
προαίρεσις μετὰ λόγου καὶ διανοίας. ὕπο- 
σημαίνειν δ᾽ ἔοικε καὶ τοὔνομα ὡς ὃν πρὸ 
ἑτέρου αἱρετόν. Dissen quotes Diod. 
XI. 11 on the heroes of Thermopylae: 
χρὴ yap οὐκ ἐκ τῶν ἀποτελεσμάτων κρί- 
νειν τοὺς ἀγαθοὺς ἄνδρας ἀλλ᾽ ἐκ τῆς 
προαιρέσεως" τοῦ μὲν γὰρ τύχη κυρία, τοῦ 
δ᾽ ἡ προαίρεσις δοκιμάζεται. te 
7. ὃ δαίμων : cf. τῷ θεῷ ἃ 193°. : 
ὃ 193. 2. τῇ μάχῃ: Chaeronea.— 
ἐν τῷ θεῷ... τέλος: cf. πέρας and δαίμων 
in § 1025 7, See Il. Vit. ror, αὐτὰρ ὕπερ- 
θεν νίκης πείρατ᾽ ἔχονται ἐν ἀθανάτοισι 
θεοῖσιν. ἶ 
3. οὐκ ἐμοί: many Mss. have ἐν dial 
5. φιλοπόνως imp δύναμιν, i.e. with 
greater labour than my strength wars 
ranted: cf. 88 160°, 2188. 


— ar ee are Sum Sea 


F 
{ ~ 


2 


TTEPI 


TOY ZTEPANOY 


137 


ἣ ὡς οὐ καλὰ καὶ τῆς πόλεως ἄξια πράγματα ἐνεστησάμην 
καὶ ἀναγκαῖα, ταῦτά μοι δεῖξον, καὶ τότ ᾿ήδη κατηγόρει μου. 


Γ εἰ δ᾽ ὁ συμβὰς σκηπτὸς [ἢ χειμὼν] μὴ μόνον ἡμῶν ἀλλὰ 

93 καὶ πάντων τῶν ἄλλων Ἑλλήνων μείζων γέγονε, τί χρὴ 

ποιεῖν; ὥσπερ ἂν εἴ τις ναύκληρον πάντ᾽ 
-- 


νον 
E77 


, Ν , Ν Ἂ 3 4 [9 ese ae , 
πράξαντα, καὶ κατασ κευάσαντα TO πλοῖον ap ὧν ὑπελάμβανε 
> κι Ν ’ 
σωθήσεσθαι, εἶτα χειμῶνι χρησάμενον καὶ πονησάντων 
ἴω ἴω ἴω x A , 
αὐτῷ TOV σκευῶν ἢ καὶ συντριβέντων ὅλως, τῆς ναυαγίας 


αἰτιῷτο. 
——— 


6. wsom. Ο. 


§ 194. τ. ἢ χειμὼν MSS., Vom., BL. ; 
ὑμῶν F. 2. πάντων om. Ar. 
5. χρησάμενον καὶ φθαρὲν O. 6. 


om. Bk., Dind., Lips., West. 
μεῖζον Υ. 4- 
καὶ (after ἢ) om. V6. 


ἀλλ᾽ οὔτ᾽ ἐκυβέρνων τὴν ναῦν, φήσειεν ἂν (ὥσπερ 


μόνων Ο. 


καὶ πᾶσι vulg.; πᾶσι om. Σ, 1,1. 


6. ἐνεστησάμην, dertook (instituted): 
cf. § Pig Je 

7. Kal ἀναγκαῖα, ad necessary” too, 
added after the verb for emphasis. Blass 
remarks that the orator has not yet at- 
tained the height from which he speaks 
in §§ 199 ff. 

8194. 1. σκηπτὸς [ἢ χειμὼν]: most 
recent editors omit ἢ χειμὼν on the ground 
that the orator, after comparing the sud- 
den raid of Philip to a thunderbolt, would 
not weaken his figure by adding a com- 
mon storm. This holds good even when 


τς we admit that χειμών and σκηπτός are 


not the same thing; and this is plain from 
Voemel’s note. Aristotle (de Mundo, 4, 
19), after describing κεραυνός, πρηστήρ, 
and τυφῶν, adds ἕκαστον δὲ τούτων κατα- 


σκῆψαν εἰς τὴν γῆν σκηπτὸς ὀνομάζεται. 


σκηπτός, therefore, is not only a stroke of 
lightning, but also a furious thunder- 
storm; while χειμών is winter, a winter- 
Storm, or @ storm in general. Perhaps 
ἢ χειμὼν here was originally a marginal 
reference to χειμώνι χρησάμενον (5). 

2. τί χρὴ ποιεῖν (sc. ἡμᾶς), what ought 
we todo? Blass and Westermann under- 


_ stand, as the suppressed reply, ‘‘ Nothing 


at all: least of all blame our leaders.” 
But I think a much more precise answer 


_ is given in the two following sentences. 


The sense is: ‘‘ What are we to ao? 
We are to do just what a ναύκληρος 
would do if any one were to blame him, 


etc. He would say ‘I was not κυβερνή- 
Ts, just as I can say ‘No more was 
I orparnyés.’”? The apodosis to εἴ τις... 
αἰτιῷτο being suppressed (except ἄν), 
its subject ναύκληρος appears in the pro- 
tasis as ναύκληρον, and the implied ὥσπερ 
dv ναύκληρος ποιήσειεν appears in φήσειεν 
ἂν (7) with its quotation, ἀλλ᾽ οὔτ᾽ ἐκυβέρ- 
vov...Tov πάντων. ἡμῶν (1) and ἐγὼ (8) 
show that the orator identifies the people 
with himself in the comparison with vav- 
κληρος. 

3. ναύκληρον, properly a shipowner, 
who sails in his own ship (as ἔμπορος), 
but generally employs a κυβερνήτης or 
sailing-master to navigate the ship. In 
Plato’s famous figure of the ship of State 
(Rep. VI. p. 488), the ναύκληρος is the 
honest old man Δῆμος Πυκνίτης, who 
knows little of navigation, and is not 
skilful enough to keep a_ professional 
sailing-master in authority, and soon lets 
the command of the ship fall into the 
hands of the most artful and unscrupulous 
landsmen on board. 

5. χειμῶνι χρησάμενον: the ναύκλης 
pos is said to have met with a storm,.— 
πονησάντων σκευῶν, when his tackling 
laboured (as we speak of a ship as /abour- 
img in a heavy sea). But Blass quotes 
φιάλαι πεπονηκόται(" from a Delian 
inscription (Dittenberger, Syll. No. 367, 
207), in support of the meaning was 
broken. 


194 


σωτηρίᾳ — 


ἂν «ἢ 
Be RE psec: 


138 AHMOZOENOY> 


510395 9. , 5... + A ΄ ΄ Ἂν 5 » 
οὐδ᾽ ἐστρατήγουν ἐγὼ), οὔτε τῆς τύχης κύριος ἦν, ἀλλ 
5 ’ὔ ~ , 3 3 3 “~ ’, Ξ Ν Ψ > Ν 
195 ἐκείνη τῶν πάντων. ἀλλ᾽ ἐκεῖνο λογίζου καὶ Opa’ εἰ μετὰ 
Θηβαίων ἡμῖν ἀγωνιζομένοις οὕτως εἵμαρτο πρᾶξαι, τί χρὴν 
προσδοκᾶν εἰ μηδὲ τούτους ἔσχομεν συμμάχους ἀλλὰ Φι- 
λίππῳ προσέθεντο, ὑπὲρ οὗ τότ᾽ ἐκεῖνος πάσας ἀφῆκε. 
5 φωνάς; καὶ εἰ νῦν τριῶν ἡμερῶν ἀπὸ τῆς ᾿Αττικῆς ὁδὸν τῆς 
A Ἂς 
μάχης γενομένης τοσοῦτος κίνδυνος καὶ φόβος περιέστη τὴν 
πόλιν, τί ἂν, εἴ που τῆς χώρας ταὐτὸ τοῦτο πάθος συνέβη, 
προσδοκῆσαι χρῆν; ap οἶσθ᾽ ὅτι νῦν μὲν στῆναι, συνελθεῖν, 


8. οὐδὲ (for οὔτε) Y. 


8 195. 2. τῶν Θηβαίων Y. χρῆν 2, Markland (conj.); χρὴ 2, L, vulg. 
5. ἀπὸ THs Atr. ὁδὸν Σ, A2; ὁδὸν ἀπὸ τῆς ‘Arr. vulg. Ths μάχης om. V6. 


6 ενομένης Σ, L, Art. 23 γεγενημένης vulg: τοσοῦτο 1... περιέσχε 
Ύ , vey _vulg ριέσχε 
(στη over σχε) Β. 7. που πλησίον τῆς χώρας At. πάθους Al. 8. οἷσθ 


OIE τς. 7. 


ee 


= 


ae ee ἐν οὐ 


Woe 


tor 


L, V6; οἷσθα Ar; οἷσθε Υ οἴεσθ᾽ Σ, O, Φ; οἴεσθε vulg. 


8195. 2. τί χρῆν προσδοκᾶν; this 
apodosis (like the similar one in lines 7, 
8) has two protases, one simply past, the 
other past with the condition unfulfilled. 
The apodosis in each case conforms to the 
latter condition. But we have in line 2 
τί χρῆν προσδοκᾶν (without ἄν), but in 
7 and ὃ τί ἂν... προσδοκῆσαι χρῆν, the 
two sentences being in other respects 
similar. We certainly should not notice 
the difference in sense if the same form 
(either with or without dv) were used 
in both. And yet the distinction be- 
tween the two is one of principle, and 
is generally obvious and important. In 
the form without dy the infinitive is 
the word on which the chief force falls, 
while in the form with ἄν the chief 
force falls on ἔδει, ἐξῆν, ἐνῆν, etc., to 
which the ἄν belongs. Thus ἐξῆν σοι 
ἐλθεῖν (in this sense) is you might have 
gone (but did not go), while ἐξῆν ἄν σοι 
ἐλθεῖν is 7¢ would have been possible for 
you to go in a certain case (but in fact it 
was not possible). In many cases (as 
here) it makes little difference to the 
general sense whether the chief emphasis 
falls on the infinitive or on the leading 
verb; and in these the effect of adding or 
omitting ἄν is slight. -In the present case 


we may translate τί χρῆν προσδοκᾶν ; 
what ought we to have expected (which we 
did not find ourselves expecting)? and τί 
ἂν προσδοκῆσαι χρῆν; what should we 
then have had to expect (which in fact we 
did not have to expect)? I have dis- 
cussed this construction at some length in 
M. T. App. v.,; and these two examples 
in p. 409. La Roche denies the exist- 
ence of χρῆν or ἐχρὴν with ἄν, proposing to 
emend ἐχρῆν ἄν in Lys. ΧΙ]. 48, but over- 
looking the present case. 

4. πάσας ἀφῆκε φωνάς, i.e. wsed all 
his eloquence: cf. Eur. Hee. 337, πάσας 
φθογγὰς ἱεῖσα, and Plat. Rep. 475 A, πάσας 
φωνὰς ἀφίετε. See § 2187. 

5. τριῶν ἡμερῶν ὁδὸν, c¢hree days’ 
journey, i.e. from Chaeronea (via Thebes) 
to the Attic frontier at Eleutherae, about 
450 stadia. It was about 250 stadia from 
Eleutherae to Athens; and. the whole 
distance from Chaeronea to Athens is 
given (§ 2307) as 700 stadia, about 80 
miles. (See BI.) ale 

8. νῦν here and τότε in 1. ro refer 


only to opposite alternatives (as “2 was, — 


and iz that case), but to the same time. 
See § 200'. The ἀποσιώπησις after τότε δὲ 
is far more eloquent than any descrip- 
tion. 


᾿ ἐξήρκει λόγος. 


4 nan 


SNA 


GS 
vulg. 
- § 296. 3. 

6. ἔδει ce B (corr.). 
᾿ς §197. 1. τοσούτῳ ΑἸ; τοσούτων Y. 


τὰς 


ὧν (for ἃ) O (mg.). 
Tw 2, vulg.; τὸ L. 


in 


9. ἀναπνεῦσαι: cf. 1]. ΧΙ. 801, ὀλίγη 
δέ τ’ ἀνάπνευσις πολέμοιο. 

Io. ἅ γε μηδὲ πεῖραν ἔδωκε, which 
never gave us even a trial (of their hor- 
rors): ἑαυτῶν is omitted, leaving πεῖραν 
Ke absolute. See note on § 107°. 
negative is μηδὲ because the ante- 
ent of ἃ is indefinite (M. T. 518). 
Il. τῷ προβάλλεσθαι... συμμαχίαν, 
by the state having this alliance to shield 
(lit. holding it before herself). The 
present infin. emphasizes the continued 
protection; προσβαλέσθαι would mean 
uiting it before herself: cf. § 300°, 
τὰ προὐβαλόμην πρὸ τῆς ᾿Αττικῆς. 
(196. 1. Ἔστι μοι πρὸς ὑμᾶς, i.e. 
tend it for you.—rTavtl πάντα τὰ 
all this long argument (so West.): 
AAG may, however, be adverbial, 
most part, chiefly, the sense being 
S Lintend chiefly for you. 
τοὺς περιεστηκότας, che spectators, 
Οἱ whom great crowds were present: see 
Aesch. Ill. 56, ἐναντίον... τῶν ἄλλων πο- 
λιτῶν ὅσοι δὴ ἔξωθεν περιεστᾶσι, καὶ τῶν 


node τῆς κρίσεως" ὁρῶ δὲ οὐκ ὀλίγους 


TEP] TOY 2TEPANOY 


τοῦτον Σ, ᾧ (yp); τοῦτον αὐτὸν vulg. 4 
προ λεγεὶν (letter erased) >. 8. 


Ἑλλήνων ὅσοις ἐπιμελὲς γέγονεν ἐπακούειν, 


139 


- Ὁ an \ , re Veg \ ΄ \ nan » an 
ἀναπνεῦσαι, πολλὰ pia ἡμέρα καὶ δύο καὶ τρεῖς ἔδοσαν TOV 


τὴν πόλιν ταύτην τὴν συμμαχίαν ἧς σὺ κατηγορεῖς. |} 

* οὗ \ v4 ἣν Ν Ν ΑΝ 
Eo. δὲ ταυτὶ πάντα μοι τὰ πολλὰ πρὸς ὑμᾶς, avdpes 196 
δικασταὶ, καὶ τοὺς περιεστηκότας ἔξωθεν καὶ ἀκροωμένους, 
ἐπεὶ πρός γε τὸν τὸν κατάπτυστον βραχὺς καὶ σαφὴς 
) > \ τ > Ν ΄, Ν ΄, ΩΣ 
εἰ μὲν γὰρ ἢν σοὶ πρόδηλα τὰ μέλλοντα; 


"ταῦτα κατηγορεῖς ἢ ἐγὼ σοῦ; τοσοῦτον γὰρ ἀμείνων ἐγὼ 


εὐνοίᾳ Ατ, F, Φ; εὐνοία 1, (0), O; εὔνοια Σ, B, 
προβάλλεσθαι L, Φ; προβαλλεσθαι Σ. 


ἐξήρκει μοι AI, 2. 
ἐγὼ σου Σ. 
ἐγὼ gov D; ἐγώ σου vulg. 


παρόντας, ἀλλ᾽ ὅσους οὐδεὶς πώποτε μέμνη- 
ται πρὸς ἀγῶνα δημόσιον παραγενομένους. 

3. βραχὺς καὶ σαφὴς λόγος: this he 
now puts into a dilemma, of which Her- 
mogenes, de Invent. Iv. 6 (p. 168 W.), 
thus speaks: τὸ δὲ διλήμματόν ἐστι τοιοῦ- 
τον οἷον... ἤδεις τὰ μέλλοντα ἔσεσθαι 
ἡ οὐκ ἤδεις; ἐάν τε γὰρ εἴπῃ ἤδειν, 
ἀπαντᾷ τί οὖν οὐ προέλεγες; ἐάν τε 
εἴπῃ οὐκ ἤδειν, τί οὖν ἡμῶν ὡς εἰδό- 
των κατηγορεῖς; εἰ μὲν γὰρ des, 
προειπεῖν ὠφειλες" εἰ δὲ οὐκ ἤδεις, τί 
τῶν ἄλλων ὡς μὴ εἰδότων κατηγο- 
ρεῖς, τῆς ἀγνοίας τῶν μελλόντων κοι- 
νῆς οὔσης πρὸς ἅπαντας ἀνθρώπους; 

4. ἐξήρκει, was enough for him; i.e. 
this would be a sufficient reply for him. 
ἐξήρκει sometimes has a force somewhat 
like that of δίκαιον nv, ἴσον ἦν, καλὸν ἦν, 
etc. when they are classed with ἔδει, χρῆν, 
etc. (M. T. 416). So satzs erat in Latin: 
see Cic. Lael. XXVI. 96, satis erat re- 
spondere Magnas: Jngentes inquit. See 
Lane’s Latin Grammar, 1496, 1497. Cf. 
θαυμαστὸν ἦν, ὃ 248°. 

8. ταῦτα: the charge of ignorance 
which you bring against me. 


as , a , / δ 9 4 9 A Ψ 

᾿ εἰς’ σωτηριαν ΤΊ) πόλει > TOTE δὲ---οὐκ ἄξιον E€LTTELWW aA YE Io 
Ὁ δὲ PSs ἊΣ θ n N > ΄,) \ a B DO θ 
BY c πειρᾶν ΕΟ κε ὕεων τινος EVVOLO και τῳ ΤρΟ a €O UAL 


bars 
ert 


se 


ΠΑΝ nA 3, at > J : 
Αἰσχίνη, μόνῳ τῶν ἄλλων, ὅτ᾽ ἐβουλεύεθ᾽ ἡ πόλις περὶ ς 
ae rie ἽΝ ΄ Sas δὲ \ As κι A. Wao 
τούτων, TOT ἐδει προλέγειν εἰ OE μὴ προῇδεις, τῆς αὐτῆς 10 
ϑ , ad GS Ὁ las » Ψ , A 9 an . μ 
ἀγνοίας ὑπευθυνός εἰ τοὺς ἀλλοις, WOTE τί μᾶλλον ἐμοῦ σὺ 


‘ 


: δ 


0 
197... 


10 


198 


140 


A / / 3 > Ee ag ἃ / Pa) + Ν 
σοῦ πολίτης γέγον᾽ εἰς αὐτὰ ταῦθ᾽ ἃ λέγω (καὶ οὕπω περὶ 
ἴω δ / Ψ 3 Ν \ » 3 3 Ν > 
τῶν ἄλλων διαλέγομαι), ὅσον ἐγὼ μὲν ἔδωκ᾽ ἐμαυτὸν εἰς 
τὰ πᾶσι δοκοῦντα συμφέρειν, οὐδένα κίνδυνον ὀκνήσας 
» »’Q> ε / \ > ¥ fp 4 > + ’ὔ 
ἴδιον οὐδ᾽ ὑπολογισάμενος, σὺ δ᾽ οὐθ᾽ ἕτερ᾽ εἶπες βελτίω 
τούτων (οὐ γὰρ ἂν τούτοις ἐχρῶντο), οὔτ᾽ εἰς ταῦτα χρήσιμον 
gy b." 

οὐδὲν σαυτὸν παρέσχες, ὅπερ δ᾽ ἂν ὁ φαυλότατος καὶ 
δυσμενέστατος ἄνθρωπος τῇ πόλει, τοῦτο πεποιηκὼς ἐπὶ 


ΔΗΛΛΟΣΘΕΝΟΥΣ 


TOU Baow ἐξήτασαι, καὶ ap ᾿Αρίστρατος ἐν Νάξῳ καὶ 
S συμ uy ᾿ μ᾽ Ἀριστραῖοςὶ : ; 


᾿Αριστόλεως ἐν Θάσῳ, ot καθάπαξ ἐχθροὶ τῆς πόλεως, τοὺς 


< 


᾿Αθηναίων κρίνουσι φίλους καὶ ᾿Αθήνησιν Αἰσχίνης Anpo- 
σθένους κατηγορεῖ. καίτοι ὅτῳ τὰ τῶν Ἑλλήνων ἀτυχήματ᾽ β 


3 A eaer’g 9 , nA a Fags , 
ἐνευδοκιμεῖν ἀπέκειτο, ἀπολωλέναι μᾶλλον οὗτός ἐστι δίκαιος 


Δ an , “Ὁ , ε \ \ 
7) KATNYOPELW ἑτέρου "Και ΟΤῳ συνενηνοχᾶάσιν οι αὐτοὶ καιροι 
' 


Ν a a / 3 a 9 » lal x 5S A 
και τοις T7)S πόλεως ἐχθροῖς, ουκ ενι τουτον εὔνουν εἰναι ΤΊ = 


2. ταῦτα (without ἃ) Σ᾽ (corr. to ταὐτ᾽ ἃ) ; ταῦτα A2. 5. 


6. “οὐδ᾽ els Y. We 


σὺ δ᾽ οὐδέτερα At. 
ἄνθ. ποιήσειε vulg. 
᾿Αριστόλαος vulg. 


πεποίηκας Y. 


8 197. 2. ταῦθ᾽ ἃ λέγω, i.e. the 
events which preceded Chaeronea. 

3. τῶν ἄλλων, doubtless later matters. 

4. τὰ πᾶσι δοκοῦντα -Ξ- ἃ πᾶσιν ἐδόκει, 
with reference to votes of the people: 
cf. 2745, 

5. ἴδιον, sersonal, e.g. the danger of 
a γραφὴ παρανόμων: cf. §§ 235°, 249. 

6. οὐ... ἐχρῶντο: sc. εἰ ἕτερ᾽ εἶπες 
βελτίω. εἰς ταῦτα, i.e. in support of my 
measures. 

7. ὅπερ δ᾽ ἂν: sc. ποιήσειεν or ἐποί- 
σεν. 

8. τῇ πόλει: for the order see § 176°. 
- πεποιηκὼς... ἐξήτασαι, you are shown to 
have done after the events: cf. Hdt. 1. 170, 
ἐπὶ διεφθαρμένοισι Ἴωσι, and ὃ 2848. 

9. ᾿Αρίστρατος, ᾿Αριστόλεως : these 
men and the condition of Naxos and 
Thasos at this time are known to us only 
from this passage. It appears that these 
islands were in the power of Alexander, 
and that the great success of his arms in 
Asia was having the same effect in them 
as in Athens, encouraging the Mace- 


Io. 


05 (corr. to οὐδ᾽) 2. . 
σεαυτὸν Ο. 8. ἄνθρωπος Σ, Li, Ar; 
᾿Αριστόλεως L, Ar; ᾿Αριστόλεος D5 | 


donian party to vex their opponents by 
prosecutions. 

10. καθάπαξ ἐχθροὶ, outright enemies. — 

it. καὶ ᾿Αθήνησιν.. κατηγορεῖ: this 
brings out clearly the meaning of τοῦτο. 
πεποιηκὼς (8). q 

8198. τ. Stw...dmékeTo, who found 
matter for glorification in the calamities 
of the Greeks: ἀπέκειτο, were laid up 
(as material). 

2. ἐνευδοκιμεῖν occurs only here in 
classic Greek, acc. to Blass, who remarks 
on the ease with which such compounds 
with ἐν are made, to be used thus in the 
infinitive: see Thuc. Il. 44, évevdatmo- 
νῆσαι and ἐντελευτῆσαι; 11. 20, évorpa- 
τοπεδεῦσαι; Hdt. 11. 178, ἐνοικῆσαι; VI. 
102, évirmedoat; Plat. Phaedr. 228 E, ; 
ἐμμελετᾶν. ---- Ἑλλήνων... ἀπέκειτο is ἃ 
dactylic hexameter. 5 

3. οἱ αὐτοὶ.. ἐχθροῖς, i.e. the same | 
occastons in which also the enemtes of the; 
state have found their advantage. 

4. εὔνουν, Joyal: see note on § 173%. / 


’ 
πατρίδι. 
ἣν 4 5 4 
καὶ πάλιν οὐ πολιτεύει. 


Ny / 5 a 
τι Kal παράδοξον εἰπεῖν. 


§ 198. 
6. ἡμῖν At. 


5. ἐξ ὧν ζῇς, ὅν the life you live: cf. 
dm αὐτῶν ὧν βεβίωκεν, ὃ 1307. ζῆν is 
the regular present to βεβιωκέναι, βιῶ not 
being in common use. (See Β].)---πολι- 
τεύει (MSS. -εύῃ) : see note on ἃ 119%. 

6. πράττεται... Αἰσχίνης and ἀντέ- 
κρουσε... Αἰσχίνης (7, 8): two paratactic 
conditional expressions,—szfpose some- 
thing ts done, etc. See ὃ 274. Dissen 
quotes Cicero’s imitation (Phil. 11. 22, 55): 
Doletis tres exercitus populi Romani 
interfectos: interfecit Antonius. Deside- 
ratis clarissimos cives: eos quoque nobis 
eripuit Antonius. Auctoritas huius ordinis 
afflicta est: afflixit Antonius. 

8. ῥήγματα καὶ σπάσματα, ruptures 
and strains: ῥῆγμα is a rupture, either 
of the flesh or of a vein; σπάσμα is 
properly the state of ¢ewston which may 
lead to a rupture, though the two terms 
seem sometimes to be used in nearly or 
quite the same sense. Hippocrates, de 
\ Flat. 11 (Littré vi. p. 109), says of 
ruptures of the flesh: τὰ δὲ ῥήγματα 
πάντα γίνεται dia τάδε" ὁκόταν ὑπὸ Bins 
διαστέωσιν αἱ σάρκες am’ ἀλλήλων, ἐς δὲ 
τὴν διάστασιν ὑποδράμῃ πνεῦμα, τοῦτο τὸν 
_ πόνον παρέχει. And de Morb. I. 20 
| (Litt. vi. p. 176), of the veins: ὁκόταν τι 
᾿ς τῶν φλεβίων σπασθὲν ῥαγῇ, ἢ σπασθῇ 
μὲν, ῥαγῇ δὲ μὴ παντελῶς, ἀλλὰ σπαδὼν 
ἐν αὐτῷ γένηται (σπαδών being the result 
_ of σπάω, apparently what Demosth. calls 
σπάσμα) : further, ἐνίοισι δὲ, ὁκόταν γένηται 
τὰ σπάσματα ἐν τῇσι σαρξὶν ἢ ἐν τῇσι 


MEP! TOY 2TEPANOY 


5. de kal >, L, Ar. 2, B; δὲ vulg. 
7. συμφέρειν om. Az. 


I4I 


lal e “ nw 
δηλοῖς δὲ καὶ ἐξ ὧν ζῇς Kat ποιεῖς καὶ πολιτεύει 
πράττεταί τι τῶν ὑμῖν δοκούντων 
, ; + > / 
συμφέρειν: ἄφωνος Αἰσχίνης. 
Ξε 3 » ΄ > / 
οἷον οὐκ ἔδει: πάρεστιν Αἰσχίνης. 


ἀντέκρουσέ τι καὶ γέγονεν 
ὥσπερ τὰ ῥήγματα καὶ 


τὰ σπάσματα, ὅταν τι κακὸν τὸ σῶμα λάβῃ, τότε κινεῖται. 
Ἐπειδὴ δὲ πολὺς τοῖς συμβεβηκόσιν ἔγκειται, βούλομαί 
καί μου πρὸς Διὸς καὶ θεῶν 


5,6. πολιτεύῃ (bis) MSS., Bk., Bl. 


καὶ παντοῖα τῶν φλεβών καὶ τών σαρκῶν" 
καὶ τούτων τὰ μὲν παραυτίκα ἔκδηλα γίνε- 
ται, τὰ δὲ ὕστερον χρόνῳ ἀναφαίνεται. 

Galen, de Meth. Medendi ΠΙ1. 1 (Χ. p. 
160, Kiihn), distinguishes κάταγμα, frac- 
ture of a bone, ῥῆγμα, rupture of the flesh, 
and σπάσμα, rupture of sinews. See also 
de Morb. Differ. 11 (VI. p. 872, Kiihn): 
τὸ δὲ ῥῆγμα kal τὸ σπάσμα τοῦ μὲν αὐτοῦ 
γένους ἐστί. συνίσταται δὲ τὸ μὲν ἐν 
σαρκώδει, τὸ δ᾽ ἐν νευρώδει μορίῳ, τῶν ἐν 
αὐτοῖς ἰνῶν διασπασθέντων ὑπὸ βιαίας τινὸς 
θλάσεως. 

8 199. 1. πολὺς ἔγκειται, 25 severe 
(presses hard) upon: cf. Thuc. Iv. 22, 
Hdt. vil. 158, and note on πολλῷ ῥέοντι 
on ὃ 1367 (above). 

2. τι καὶ παράδοξον : the orator now 
rises to a new height. Heretofore he has 
maintained vigorously (as in § 194) that 
the policy of Athens in opposing Philip 
under his lead was sound and hopeful, 
and that he cannot justly be censured 
now, even if events have shown the 
‘‘mistake” of waging war against the 
Macedonian power. He now suddenly 
changes his ground, and declares that 
there has been no ‘‘mistake,’’ that no 
other policy was possible for Athens 
with her glorious antecedents, even if the 
whole future, with Chaeronea and its 
banéful consequences, had been foreseen 
from the beginning. This is the final 
answer to the petty criticisms of Aeschines 


199 


‘after the events” (ἐπὶ τοῖς συμβᾶσιν, 
§ 1978). Fox (Kranzrede, p. 172) says: 
‘*Niemand soll ihm irgend welche Ver- 
legenheit anmerken, deshalb gesteht er 


φλεψὶν,... γίνεται ἀλγήματα πολυχρόνια, 
ἃ καὶ καλέουσι ῥήγματα. Again in § 22 
' ρ. 184) he speaks οἵ ῥήγματα πολλά τε 


142 


μηδεὶς τὴν ὑπερβολὴν θαυμάσῃ, ἀλλὰ μετ᾽ εὐνοίας ὃ λέγω 
εἰ γὰρ ἣν ἅπασι πρόδηλα τὰ μέλλοντα γενή- 
ς σεσθαι, καὶ προήδεσαν πάντες, καὶ σὺ προὔλεγες, Αἰσχίνη, 
καὶ διεμαρτύρου βοῶν καὶ κεκραγὼς, ὃς οὐδ᾽ ἐφθέγξω, οὐδ᾽ 
οὕτως ἀποστατέον τῇ πόλει τούτων ἢν, εἴπερ ἢ δόξης 
200 προγόνων ἢ τοῦ μέλλοντος αἰῶνος εἶχε λόγον. νῦν μέν 
ἀποτυχεῖν δοκεῖ τῶν πραγμάτων, ὃ πᾶσι κοινόν ἐστιν͵ 

τῷ θεῷ ταῦτα δοκῇ" τότε δ᾽ ἀξιοῦσα 


θεωρησάτω. 


> is Y 

ἀνθρώποις ΟοΤοαν 
, at 

T POEOTAVAL των 


5 \ \ Ὁ Te) id F 3 ὃ ν > 5 e 4 i 
ἀκονιτὶ, περὶ ὧν οὐδένα κίνδυνον ὄντιν οὐχ ὑπέμειναν OL 
Δ A \ Ν A , a 
πρόγονοι, τίς οὐχὶ κατέπτυσεν ἂν σοῦ;; μὴ γὰρ τῆς πόλεώς 
a > A \ δ ε a a 
201 ye, pnd ἐμοῦ. τίσι δ᾽ ὀφθαλμοῖς πρὸς Διὸς ἐωρωμεν av 


ΔΗΛΛΟΣΘΕΝΟΥΣ 


ἄλλων, εἶτ᾽ 
, , “Δ » Le ὦ > \ lal Ὁ “9 
5 προδεδωκέναι TAVTAS AV EO KEV αιτιαν. Εἰ γὰρ ταυτα TT POELT ; 


x“ 
y) 2 
x 
ie 


> a ΄ ΄ ᾿ 
ἀποστᾶσα τούτου, Φιλίππῳ 


x 


5. πάντες 2, L, ®; 


8 199. 3. ὃ ἐγὼ λέγω A2. 4. μέλλ. ἔσεσθαι AT. ᾿ 
ἅπαντες vulg. Αἰσχίνη =, L, Φ᾽ ; om. vulg. 6. διεμαρτύρω At. 7. εἴπει 
καὶ ΟἹ. 

§ 200. 1. μέν γ᾽ Σ. L}, Ar; μὲν γὰρ vulg. 4. τῶν Ἑλλήνων Z (yp); 
O (mg.), ®, Dion. 6. ἀκονειτι D3 ἀκονιτεί Bi. οὐχ ἕνα Al. τιν᾽ 
οὐχ Σ, L}, Ar; ὁντινοῦν οὐχ 1.2, vulg. 7. τίς ἂν At (w. ἄν σου). ἄν σον MSS. 


(av σου Σ); ἂν σοῦ Bk. γὰρ δὴ At. 


ὶ 
& 


ae 


nicht nur das Paradoxe seiner Behauptung 
selbst zu, sondern macht auch die in der 
Hypothesis ef yap ἦν ἅπασι πρόδηλα... 
liegende Concession durch Haufung der 
Ausdriicke so grossmiithig und riickhalts- 
los, dass jedermann die Zuversicht und 
Siegesgewissheit des Sprechers von vorn- 
herein mitempfindet.”—kat pov...0av- 
μάσῃ: an instance of προδιόρθωσις, of 
which another case is ὃ 2211, ἐπεπείσμην 
k.T-A., both quoted as examples by Ti- 
berius περὶ σχημάτων 8 (VIII. p. 535, 

5. καὶ σὺ προὔλεγες: the figure of 
Aeschines himself joining in the general 
warning adds greatly to the picture. 

6. ὃς οὐδ᾽ ἐφθέγξω, you who did not 
even open your mouth.—ov8’ οὕτως, not 
even then: οὕτως sums up in one word 
the whole of the preceding condition 
(4—6). 

7. ἀποστατέον... ἦν -- ἔδει τὴν πόλιν 
ἀποστῆναι. 

8, τοῦ μέλλοντος αἰῶνος, future ages. 


§ 200. τ. νῦν μὲν... τότε δ᾽ (3): see 
note on § 1058. q 
2. ἀποτυχεῖν, 720 have failed (in secur- 
ing).—Tev πραγμάτων, mere material 
objects, opposed to the high principles 
which would have been sacrificed in the 
other case (rére). a 
3. ἀξιοῦσα (imperf.), while she had 
claimed, followed by the aorist ἀποστᾶ 
and then withdrew, both past to ἔσχεν 
We might have had ἠξίου and ἀπέστη: 
cf. XV. 27, ὧν ἀπέστη. 7 
6. ἀκονιτὶ, wethout a struggle, sine 
pulvere; cf. XIX. 77.—ov8éva ὅντιν᾽ ody, 
emphatic equivalent of πάντα : the natural 
nominative οὐδεὶς ὅστις οὐ (Ξε πᾶς) is il. 
logically declined. f 
7. σοῦ (accented), with special em- 
phasis.—py γὰρ (sc. εἰπέ), don’t say th 
state, nor me: πόλεως and ἐμοῦ continus 
the case of cod. =f 
§ 201. 1. τίσι δ᾽... ἑωρῶμεν ἂν; i.¢ 
how should we now (dare to) look im the 
Jace, etc.? 


Veter ΤΕΦΆΝΟΥ 143 


\ 9 \ , ef , 9 , 3 \ \ 
τοὺς εἰς τὴν πόλιν ἀνθρώπους ἀφικνουμένους, εἰ τὰ μὲν 
᾿ πράγματ᾽ εἰς ὅπερ νυνὶ περιέστη ἡγεμὼν δὲ καὶ κύριος 
ey eis a Ν᾿ ὩΣ ἘΠ τς oat’ ΄ n> 
᾿ς ηρέθη Φίλιππος ἁπάντων, τὸν δ᾽ ὑπὲρ τοῦ μὴ γενέσθαι ταῦτ 
᾿ ἀγῶνα ἕτεροι χωρὶς ἡμῶν ἦσαν πεποιημένοι, καὶ τἀῦτα 5 
| μηδεπώποτε Τῆς πόλεως ἐν τοῖς ἔμπροσθε χρόνοις ἀσφάλειαν 

L00€ ἄλλον ἢ τὸν ὑπὲρ τῶν καλῶν Kivd 7 
ἄδοξον μᾶλλον ἢ τὸν ὑπὲρ τῶν ν κίνδυνον ῃρημένης. 
<> ε 4 ’ὔ Ν a ο 

τίς γὰρ οὐκ οἷδεν Ἑλλήνων, τίς δὲ βαρβάρων, ὅτι καὶ παρὰ 202. 
Θηβαίων καὶ παρὰ τῶν ἔτι τούτων πρότερον ἰσχυρῶν γενο-- \ 
μένων Λακεδαιμονίων καὶ παρὰ τοῦ Περσῶν βασιλέως μετὰ 

ΟΝ ΄, A> x 3 , 2907 ὃν ΄ Ψ ᾿ 
πολλῆς χάριτος τοῦτ᾽ ἂν ἀσμένως ἐδόθη τῇ πόλει, ὅ τι 
βούλεται λαβούσῃ καὶ τὰ ἑαυτῆς ἐχού ὁ κελευό 

n NS ἐχούσῃ τὸ κελευόμενον ς 


, Struggle. 


~ Ν 5 ΔΑ ν “A ε 3 / 
ποιεῖν καὶ ἐὰν ἐτερον τῶν λλήνων προεσταναι. 


§ 201. 2. μὲν om. ΟἹ. 3: 
Dind., Bl.; ὑμών 2, L, Vom., West. 
(p μενης alone legible). 

§ 202. 2. 
αὐτοῦ τοῦ A2. 


περιέστηκεν At. 5. 


καὶ παρὰ τῶν ἔτι... Λακ. om. A2. 


6. μὴ ἐᾶν V6 (yp mg.). 


ἀλλ᾽ οὐκ 


ἡμῶν vulg., Bk., 
ἡρημένης ="; alpauévns ?? (cf. § 208°) =} 


γεγενημένων At. 3. Trap’ 


2- 07. εἰ τὰ pev...npynwévys: this elabo- 
rate protasis has three divisions; (1) εἰ τὰ 
μὲν... ἁπάντων, (2) τὸν δὲ... πεποιημένοι, 
(3) καὶ ταῦτα... ἡρημένης. The clause 
ἡγεμὼν δὲ.. ἁπάντων belongs closely with 
the preceding εἰ μὲν περιέστη, and τὸν δ᾽ 
(not ἡγεμὼν δὲ) corresponds to τὰ μὲν. 


‘The first division, εἰ... ἁπάντων, contains 


no unreal condition, except in combina- 
tion with the second; but the protasis as 
a whole does express an unreal condition: 
see M.T. 511. 

3. εἰς ὅπερ νυνὶ, fo the present state, 
explained by the following clause. 
4. TOV...ayava, the fight to prevent 
this. 

5. ἕτεροι χωρὶς ἡμῶν: this pathetic 
picture of Athens sitting still and seeing 
others fight the battle for Grecian liberty 
becomes more effective when we re- 
member (what Demosthenes never forgot) 
that Greece at this crisis had no state 
except Athens able or willing to take the 
lead, or any important part, in such a 


orator speaks freely and openly on this 


| point. 


See §§ 304, 305, where the | 


5. καὶ ταῦτα, and this too, introducing 
the participial clause which completes the 
supposition. . 

ὃ 202. τ. τίς.. βαρβάρων: cf. ΧΙΧ. 
312.---παρὰ Θηβαίων: in the time of 
Epaminondas. 

2. παρὰ....Λακεδαιμονίων : after the 
Peloponnesian war, and before Leuctra. 

3. παρὰ... βασιλέως, from Xerxes: see 
the order given to Mardonius before the 
battle of Plataea, reported to Athens by 
Alexander, king of Macedonia (Hat. vit. 
140): τοῦτο μὲν THY γῆν ode ἀπόδος, τοῦτο 
δὲ ἄλλην πρὸς ταύτῃ ἑλέσθων αὐτοὶ, ἣν- 
τινα ἂν ἐθέλωσι, ἐόντες αὐτόνομοι. Cf. 
Hdt. 1x. 4, 5; Dem. VI. 11. 

4. ὅ τι βούλεται.. προεστάναι: i.e. 
to keep her own and receive anything she 
wanted, on condition of being subject to 
Persia. Logically the participles and in- 
finitives would be interchanged, as τοῦτο, 
the subject of ἐδόθη, is not ποιεῖν and ἐᾶν, 
but λαβούσῃ and ἐχούσῃ. But the present 
form gives greater emphasis to the dis- 
graceful part of the proposition, which is 
in the infinitives. 


204 


144 AHMOZOENOY> 


nv ταῦθ᾽, ws ἔοικε, τοῖς ᾿Αθηναϊδῦς πάτρια οὐδ᾽ ἀνεκτὰ οὐδ᾽ 
ἔμφυτα, οὐδ᾽ ἐδυνήθη πώποτε τὴν πόλιν οὐδεὶς ἐκ παντὸς 
τοῦ χρόνου πεῖσαι τοῖς ἰσχύουσι μὲν μὴ δίκαια δὲ πράττουσι 
προσθεμένην ἀσφαλῶς δουλεύειν, ἀλλ᾽ ἀγωνιζομένη περὶ 
πρωτείων καὶ τιμῆς καὶ δόξης κινδυνεύουσα πάντα τὸν 
αἰῶνα διατετελεκε. καὶ ταῦθ᾽ οὕτω σεμνὰ καὶ προσήκοντα 2 
τοῖς ὑμετέροις ἤθεσιν ὑμεῖς ὑπολαμβάνετ᾽ εἶναι ὥστε καὶ 
τῶν προγόνων τοὺς ταῦτα πράξαντας μάλιστ᾽ ἐπαινεῖτε. 
εἰκότως" τίς γὰρ οὐκ ἂν ἀγάσαιτο τῶν ἀνδρῶν ἐκείνων τῆς 
ἀρετῆς, ot καὶ τὴν χώραν καὶ τὴν πόλιν ἐκλιπεῖν ὑπέμειναν 
εἰς τὰς τριήρεις ἐμβάντες ὑπὲρ τοῦ μὴ τὸ κελευόμενον 
ποιῆσαι, τὸν μὲν ταῦτα συμβουλεύσαντα Θεμιστοκλέα 
στρατηγὸν ἑλόμενοι, τὸν δ᾽ ὑπακούειν ἀποφηνάμενον τοῖς 

§ 208. 2. τοῖς τότε AO. A1; τότε τοῖς 1,1: τότε over τοῖς =? (cf. ὃ 2057); ταῦτα | 


τοῖς ᾽Αθ. τοῖς τότε, ws ἔοικε A2. 6. δόξης καὶ A τ. 2, O (corr.). 


8 204. 2. ὑμετέροις Σ,, L, Ar. 2; ἡμεῖ-: vulg. ἔθεσιν Ο. ὑπολαμβάνετε 
Σ, L, ΒΞ; ὑπελαμβάνετε Ar, B}, vulg. 4. ἀγασθείη Cob. (conj.). τὰς 
ἀρετὰς (late corr. of τῆς ἀρετῆς) Σ. 6. <a V6. 7. μὲν yap A2. 
συμβουλεύοντα A2. 8. ἀποφ. τοῖς ἐπιταττ. Σ, L, Ar; τοῖς emir. arog. vulg.; 
τοῖς ἐπιτ. om. Harpocr. (under Κυρσίλον), Bl. 


8 208. 2. ὡς ἔοικε, spoken with μένη (8 203°), ὥστε καὶ τῶν προγόνων, and 
sarcasm: cf. § 2125 (Β].).---πάτρια, i.e. τίς yap οὐ κἂν ἀγάσαι(το), -~L~~-, 
inherited from their ancestors.—ov8’ ave- Cobet emends it to ἀγασθείη. ] 
κτὰ implies that they revolted morally 5. πόλιν ἐκλιπεῖν refers to the time | 
against the idea; οὐδ᾽ ἔμφυτα that it was before the battle of Salamis when, by 
against their nature as Athenians. the advice of Themistocles, Athens was 

3. ἐκ παντὸς τοῦ χρόνου, from the abandoned to Xerxes, and all was staked 
beginning of time, a rhetorical ὑπερβολή, on a sea-fight: so VI. 11. See Cicero, a 
as in § 66°; in § 267 it means from the Offic. 11. 11, 48: Cyrsilum quendam, 
beginning of the transaction in question. suadentem ut in urbe manerent Xerxem- 

4. μὴ δίκαια: μὴ, not ov,as we should que reciperent, lapidibus ~ -obruerunt. 
say ol μὴ δίκαια πράττουσιν (ἃ. 1612). Herodotus, Ix. 5, tells a similar story of 

5. προσθεμένην, aking the side of, the stoning of a senator named Lycid ag; 
attaching herself to: οἵ. § 227°.—aoegpadas with his wife and children, before the 
δουλεύειν : the same idea of security in battle of Plataea, when Mardonius ent 
slavery is found in the speech of Pericles, his second message to Athens (for the 
Thuc. 11. 63 (end).—déyovifopévn, as earlier message see note on ὃ 202°). 
partic. of manner, modifies κιδυνεύουσα 6. ὑπὲρ τοῦ μὴ... ποιῆσαι: ὑπὲρ with 
διατετέλεκε. the Sgt of the infin. for a final clause, as 

6. πρωτείων, τιμῆς, δόξης : cf. ὃ 667. in § 2058, and in Aesch. 111. 1, ὑπὲρ τοῦ.. 

§ 204. 2. ἤθεσιν, moral feelings: μὴ γίγνεσθαι. 
see note on § 114”. 8. τὸν ὑπακούειν ἀποφηνάμενον, 2 

4. ἀγάσαιτο: Blass accounts for this declared himself for obedience: generally 
epic aorist by the rhythms of ἀλλ᾽ ἀγωνιζο- γνώμην ἀποφαίνεσθαι, see § 189%. 


5 
4 


——— 


| only 


TEP! TOY ZTEPANOY 


145 


a ΄ , , > ee ee 
ἐπιταττομένοις Κυρσίλον καταλιθώσαντες, οὐ μόνον αὐτὸν, 


5 Ἂς \ ε “ ε ε J Χ ‘le at > eS 
ἀλλὰ καὶ αἱ γυναῖκες αἱ ὑμέτεραι τὴν γυναῖκ αὐτοῦ. 


9 
ου 


\ ὃ. , ς ε νι 9 nr 5» Cur , 5» Ν 
γαρ ἐζήτουν οἱ τότ Αθηναῖοι OUTE ρητορα OVTE στρατΉγον 
ὃ “ΣΝ ὃ ͵ὕ ΕῚ lal > 3 > \ “ 5 ,ὔ 5 \ 

νι ὁτου δουλεύσουσιν ευὐυτυχως, ἀλλ᾽ οὐδὲ ζῆν ἠξίουν ει μὴ 


3 3 , 5." 2 A A ε A \ a aN 
ς μετ ἐλευθερίας ἐξέσται ΤΟΥ͂ΤΟ 7TTOLELV. NYELTO Yop QUT WV 


4 A la 
ἕκαστος οὐχὶ τῷ πατρὶ Kal TH μητρὶ μόνον γεγενῆσθαι, 


ἀλλὰ καὶ τῇ πατρίδι. 


f \ , ν ε Ν “ 
διαφέρει δὲ τί; ὅτι ὁ μὲν τοῖς 
γονεῦσι μόνον γεγενῆσθαι νομίζων τὸν τῆς εἱμαρμένης καὶ - 


bien > / 4 ζ΄ ε oy Ν “A / ε \ 
τὸν αὐτόματον θάνατον περιμένει, 6 δὲ καὶ TH πατρίδι ὑπὲρ 
. ~ Ν yd 3 ~ / 3 iz 3 4 
TOU μὴ ταύτην ἐπιδεῖν δουλεύουσαν ἀποθνήσκειν ἐθελήσει, 
+ 4 ε 4 Ἂς ν \ N\ > , ἃ 
καὶ φοβερωτέρας ἡγήσεται τὰς ὕβρεις καὶ τὰς ἀτιμίας, ἃς 
ἐν δουλευούσῃ τῇ πόλει φέρειν ἀνάγκη, τοῦ θανάτου. 


9. Κυρσίλον L, vulg.; Κύρσιλον Σ. 
§ 205. 53. 


ὌΠ 2, L. αὑτῶν Σ. ἘΣ 
Ἶ 
ἢ 9. 9 €s: acc. to Bl., the 
a of καταλιθόω for 
καταλεύω. 
το. αἱ γυναῖκες... αὐτοῦ : the vividness 
of the picture in the easy flowing narrative 
is heightened by the irregular insertion of 
a new subject, ai γυναῖκες, as if without 
premeditation. Aristides (46, p. 287) 
tells the story more grammatically, but 
far less forcibly: συλλεγέντες πάντες κατέ- 
λευσαν αὐτοὶ μὲν αὐτὸν, ai δὲ γυναῖκες τὴν 
γυναῖκα αὐτοῦ. 
ΟΝ this and ὃ 205 compare the speech 
of the Athenian envoy at Sparta more 


| than a century earlier, Thuc. 1. 73-75. 


8 205. 3. δι᾽ ὅτου δουλεύσουσιν : 
final relative. With δουλεύσουσιν εὐτυχῶς 
(sarcastic) cf. ἀσφαλῶς δουλεύειν, § 203°. 
—ei μὴ ἐξέσται, 17, they could not (were 
not to be able): εἰ μὴ ἐξέσοιτο might be 
used (M.T. 694, 695). 

5. οὐχὶ... γεγενῆσθαι: cf. Plat. Crit. 
50D—5rB; and Arist. Eth. 1. 7, 6, τὸ δ᾽ 
αὔταρκες λέγομεν οὐκ αὐτῷ μόνῳ τῷ ζῶντι 
βίον μονώτην, ἀλλὰ (sc. τῷ ζῶντι) καὶ 
γονεῦσι καὶ τέκνοις κιτ.Ὰλ., where αὐτῷ 


_ μόνῳ and γονεῦσι both depend on ζῶντι 


(living for himself alone, and living also 


| for parents etc.), as πατρὶ, μητρὶ, and 


γονεῦσι in Demosthenes depend on γε- 
G. ‘ue 


δουλεύσωσιν V6; δουλεύουσιν O. 

iind., West., Bl; om. 2, L!, Bk., Vom.,. Lips. 7: 
γενέσθαι ΝΟ. 6. 
θανάτου Σ, L, F (yp), Φ (yp), vulg.; om. O. 


εὐτυχῶς (after δουλεύσ.) vulg., 
αὐτοῖς (before ἐξέσται) vulg. ; 
ὅτι om. A2. 11. «TOU 


γενῆσθαι. The passage of Aristotle is 
sometimes called ungrammatical ! 

7. τὸν τῆς εἱμαρμένης θάνατον, the 
death of Fate, i.e. death at an appointed 
time, opposed to voluntary death, as 
when one gives his life for his country 
(cf. ἀποθνήσκειν ἐθελήσει, 0): τὸν αὐτό- 
ματον Ody. is zatural (opposed to vio/ent) 
death. The two are really the same, 
from different points of view (see West.). 
Aulus Gellius (x111. 1) discusses the say- 
ing of Cicero (Phil. I. 4, 10), multa autem 
impendere videntur praeter naturam etiam 
practerque fatum, and decides that Cicero 
means the same by zaturam and fatum, 
both being opposed to violentam et inopt- 
natam mortem. After quoting the present 
passage of Demosthenes, Gellius thus 
concludes: Quod Cicero /fatum atque 
naturam videtur dixisse, id multo ante 
Demosthenes τὴν πεπρωμένην et τὸν αὐτό- 
ματον θάνατον appellavit. Αὐτόματος enim 
θάνατος, quasi naturalis et fatalis, nulla 
extrinsecus vi coactus venit. (See Dissen’s 
note.) 

8. Kal τῇ πατρίδι: sc. γεγενῆσθαι 
νομίζων.---ὑπὲρ τοῦ.. ἐπιδεῖν : cf. § 204°. 

9. δουλεύουσαν: see M.T. 885. With 
the pres. partic. cf. μή μ᾽ ἰδεῖν θαν ὁὀν θ᾽, 
not to see me killed, Eur. Orest. 746. 


Io 


205 


Io 


146 


206 


AHMOZOENOY2 


wis , αν. , , εἰ lou , 

Εἰ μὲν τοίνυν τοῦτ᾽ ἐπεχείρουν λέγειν, ὡς ἐγὼ προήγαγον 
ὑμᾶς ἄξια τῶν προγόνων φρονεῖν, οὐκ ἔσθ' ὅστις οὐκ ἂν 
εἰκότως ἐπιτιμήσειέ μοι. νῦν δ᾽ ἐγὼ μὲν ὑμετέρας τὰς 
τοιαύτας προαιρέσεις ἀποφαίνω, καὶ δείκνυμι ὅτι καὶ πρὸ 

ς ἐμοῦ τοῦτ᾽ εἶχε τὸ φρόνημ᾽ ἡ πόλις, τῆς μέντοι διακονίας 

τῆς ἐφ᾽ ἑκάστοις τῶν πεπραγμένων καὶ ἐμαυτῷ μετεῖναί 
207 φημι, οὗτος δὲ τῶν ὅλων κατηγορῶν, καὶ κελεύων ὑμᾶς ἐμοὶ 29 
πικρῶς ἔχειν ὡς φόβων καὶ κινδύνων αἰτίῳ τῇ πόλει, τῆς 
μὲν εἰς τὸ παρὸν τιμῆς ἔμ᾽ ἀποστερῆσαι γλίχεται, τὰ δ᾽ εἰς 
ἅπαντα τὸν λοιπὸν χρόνον ἐγκώμι᾽ ὑμῶν ἀφαιρεῖται. εἰ 


8 206. 1. ὡς ἄρα At. 2. προσήγαγον Ol. 2. ἔσθ᾽ X, L; éorw vulg. 
Boris οὐκ ἂν εἰκότως D (yp), vulg.; δτισὰνόυ κὰἀνεικοτως (w. erasure after év), Σ ; ὅστις 
ἂν οὐκ ἂν 1,; bor. ἂν οὐκ εἰκότως Ο ; ὅστις οὐκ ἂν οὐκ elk. ΕΣ 3. ἐπετίμησε. 
Αι, Y, B (over ἐπιτιμήσειε), Dion., Bl.; ἐπιτιμήσειε Σ, vulg. 4. ἀποφαίνω 
προαιρέσεις L. πρὸς ἐμοῦ ΟἹ. 

8 207. 2. γεγενημένῳ (after πόλει) vulg.; om. 2, 1}, AlLw 4. των λοιπὼν 


χρονων (o over each w) B. 


§§ 206—210 conclude the digres- 
sion which begins in § 188. The orator 
here appeals to the judges not to convict 
Ctesiphon, as this will be a condemnation 
of the people of Athens for maintaining 
the ancient glories of the state, the glories 
of Marathon and Salamis. 3 

§ 206. τ. ἐεἰ... ἐπεχείρουν... ἐπιτιμή- 
σειέ μοι: this combination of a present 
unreal condition, if J were undertaking, 
with a future conclusion, everybody would 
justly censure me, is rare, and perhaps 
strictly illogical. Several good Mss. and 
Dionysius (p. 1054) have ἐπετίμησε, which 
Blass adopts. But this past apodosis 
would compel us to make εἰ ἐπεχείρουν 
past also, if.Z had been undertaking, 
which would greatly weaken the whole 
sentence. We should expect an imperfect 
with ἄν in the apodosis; and this is im- 
plied, though not expressed, in the some- 
what condensed form which we have. 
The real meaning is, 7f J were (now) 
undertaking to tell you this, the result 
would be that a// would justly censure me. 
This could have been rather pedantically 
expressed by οὐκ ἂν ἦν ὅστις, but οὐκ ἔσθ᾽ 
ὅστις is much smoother and more natural. 


~ herself and of all her glorious history. Ὁ 


Our ambiguous zwoz/d only conceals the 
difficulty. (M.T. 504.) 

5. διακονίας, ic. what he terms the 
menial service is all that he claims for 
himself. This is in striking contrast with — 
his claim for full recognition of his public — 
services elsewhere: cf. §§ 297—300- But | 
in this grand glorification of Athens and — 
her noble services to freedom, the more 
he depreciates himself and exalts the 
state, the stronger does he make his argu- 
ment that the condemnation of Ctesiphon 
now would be a condemnation of Athens — 


Notice the antitheses in this passage: 
first, the main one, ef μὲν and viv de: 
then, within the latter, ἐγὼ μὲν and οὗτος 
δὲ (ξ 2071), ὑμετέρας and καὶ ἐμαυτῷ, 
προαιρέσεις and διακονίας. _ 

§ 207. 1. τῶν ὅλων: opposed to τῆς. 
ἐφ᾽ ἑκάστοις (διακονίας), ὃ 206°, Ὦ 

2. τῆς εἰς τὸ παρὸν τιμῆς: i.e. the 
crown. | 

3. τὰ... ἐγκώμι᾽ : 1.6. your glories” 
the past will be lost for all future time 
: me 
if they are condemned by your vote to- 
day. “ 

4. ἀφαιρεῖται is conative: cf. § 13% 


a 
Tol 


͵ 


\ 
ἊΝ 
ζ, 


ΠΕΡῚ ΤΟῪ ΣΤΕΦΑΝΟῪ 147 


Ν ¢ > Ν Ψ' 5 ~ 4 N 
yap ὡς ov τὰ βέλτιστα ἐμοῦ πολιτευσαμένου τουδὶ KaTa- 5 
ψηφιεῖσθε, ἡμαρτηκέναι δόξετε, οὐ τῇ τῆς τύχης ἀγνωμοσύνῃ 

ee Pum? A > 3 3 Ξ, 3 ΕΣ Ψ 
τὰ συμβάντα παθεῖν.] ἀλλ᾽ οὐκ ἔστιν, οὐκ ἔστιν ὅπως 208 
ε ἴω ᾿Ξ, 3 “a \ ε \ ~ ε ’ὔ’ 3 ᾿ 
ἡμάρτετε, ἄνδρες ᾿Αθηναῖοι, τὸν ὑπὲρ τῆς ἁπάντων ἐλευθερίας 
καὶ σωτηρίας κίνδυνον ἀράμενοι! μὰ τοὺς Μαραθῶνι προκιν- 
δυνεύσαντας τῶν προγόνων καὶ τοὺς ἐν Πλαταιαῖς παρατα- 


δ ἐν οἷα. (Ὁ. 
before ἀγνωμοσύνῃ (-νῃ for -νηι) >. 

8 208. 2. ἡμαρτήκατε At. 2. 
μένοι = (cf. ὃ 2017). 


καταψηφίζεσθε Az. 


οὐδ᾽ ὅλως ἡμαρτήκατε, ὦ ᾽ΔΑθ. V6. =e 
μὰ Σ; οὐ μὰ L, vulg. 


6 τῇ om» ©. Two letters erased 


αιρά- 
Μαραθῶνι 2; ἐν Map. L, vulg. 


4- Πλατειαῖς (aus corr., and at over εἰ) D>; Πλαταιᾶι At. 


5. τουδὶ, Ctesiphon, like τουτονί in 
§ 15°. 

6. ἀγνωμοσύνῃ, harshness (want of 
feeling): cf. ὃ 252). dyvwuovG may mean 
to be thoughtless or inconsiderate: cf. §§ 94”, 
248%, : 

7. τὰ συμβάντα, what befell you, 
including Chaeronea. 

§ 208. The famous oath by the 
heroes of Marathon, Plataea, Salamis, 
and Artemisium here follows. The 
grandeur of this solemn invocation of the 
shades of the mighty dead, to support 
the orator in his last and noblest assertion 
of the true spirit of Athenian liberty, will 
strike the most indifferent reader. We 
| do not envy one who is strong enough to 
read this passage without emotion. Lord 
Brougham says: ‘‘The whole passage, 


| which ends here, and begins εἰ yap ταῦτα 


προεῖτο ἀκονιτί (ὃ 200), is deserving of 
close study, being one of the greatest 
pieces of declamation on record in any 
tongue.” See Longinus on the Sublime 
16: ἀπόδειξιν ὁ Δημοσθένης ὑπὲρ τῶν 
πεπολιτευμένων εἰσφέρει"..." οὐχ ἡμάρτετε, 
ὦ τὸν ὑπὲρ τῆς Ἑλλήνων ἐλευθερίας ἀγῶνα 
ἀράμενοι" ἔχετε δὲ οἰκεῖα τούτου παρα- 
δείγματα" οὐδὲ γὰρ οἱ ἐν Μαραθῶνι ἥμαρτον 
οὐδ᾽ οἱ ἐν Σαλαμῖνι κ.τ.λ." ἀλλ᾽ ἐπειδὴ, 
καθάπερ ἐμπνευσθεὶς ἐξαίφνης ὑπὸ θεοῦ 
| καὶ οἱονεὶ φοιβόληπτος γενόμενος. τὸν τῶν 

ἀριστέων τῆς Ἑλλάδος ὅρκον ἐξεφώνησεν, 
_fovx ἔστιν ὅπως ἡμάρτετε, μὰ τοὺς ἐν 
“Μαραθῶνι προκινδυνεύσαντας,᾽ φαίνεται δι’ 
ἑνὸς τοῦ ὀμοτικοῦ σχήματος, ὅπερ ἐνθάδε 
| ἀποστροφὴν ἔγὼ καλῶ, τοὺς μὲν προγόνους 


‘expressions of admiration 


ἀποθεώσας, ὅτι δεῖ τοὺς οὕτω ἀποθανόντας , 
ὡς θεοὺς ὀμνύναι παριστάνων, τοῖς δὲ κρί- 
νουσι τὸ τῶν ἐκεῖ προκινδυνευσάντων ἐν- 
τιθεὶς φρόνημα, τὴν δὲ τῆς ἀποδείξεως 
φύσιν μεθεστακὼς εἰς ὑπερβάλλον ὕψος καὶ 
βάθος. Hermogenes περὶ ἰδεῶν 1. 9 
(111. pp- 246, 247 W.): ἔτι μεθόδου λαμ- 
πρᾶς καὶ τὸ τὰ ἔνδοξα ἐνδοξοτέρως λέγειν 
(gloriosa etiam gloriosius extulit, Dissen), 
ὥσπερ ἐκεῖνο εἴρηται TO οὐ μὰ τοὺς ἐν 
Μαραθῶνι κιτ.λ. Among the noted 
in ancient 
writers cited by Reiske and other older 
editors are Aristid. Art. Rhet. 1. 1, 7_ 
(IX. pp. 344, 345 W.), Clem. Alex. Strom. 
Vil 2, 20, Quint. XE.73;. 168. 

I. οὐκ ἔστιν.. -ἡμάρτετε, 22 cannot be 
that ye erred: οὐκ ἔστιν ὅπως κεοὐδαμῶς. 
See critical notes on §§ 47° and 521. 

3. ἀράμενοι: cf. πόλεμον ἄρασθαι, 
V. 5.--μὰ τοὺς: most MSS. prefix οὐ, 
which 2 omits, μά generally implying a 
negation.—tovs...mpoydvey (those of) our 
ancestors who bore the brunt of battle at 
Marathon: προκινδυνεύω is here stand 
forward (as πρόμαχος) to face the foe; 
from its idea of contending it may take 
a dative like μάχομαι, as in Thue. I. 73, 
φαμὲν yap Μαραθῶνι μόνοι προκινδυνεῦσαι 
τῷ βαρβάρῳ, a passage which may have 
suggested προκινδυνεύσαντας to Demo- 
sthenes here. Further, προκινδυνεύω, like 
προμάχομαι and mpouaxéw, may mean 
incur danger (or contend) for (wpo-) any- 
one, as Xen. Hier. Χ. 8, προνοοῦσι καὶ 
προκινδυνεύουσι τῶν πολιτῶν ; [Andoc.] 
IV. 1, προκινδυνεύειν τοῦ πλήθους : Simon. 


ΤΟ “5 ὦ 


148 ΔΗΛΛΟΣΘΕΝΟΥΣ 


4 \ Ν 3 a , ἊΝ Ν LPP 
5 ξαμένους καὶ τοὺς ἐν Σαλαμῖνι ναυμαχήσαντας καὶ TOUS ἐπ᾿ 
9 ἴω 
Ἀρτεμισίῳ καὶ πολλοὺς ἑτέρους τοὺς ἐν τοῖς δημοσίοις 
΄ > " Y 

μνήμασι κειμένους, ἀγαθοὺς ἄνδρας, ovs ἅπαντας ὁμοίως 

ε / an > “ > ’ lal » 5 / > A 

ἡ πόλις τῆς αὐτῆς ἀξιώσασα τιμῆς ἔθαψεν, Αἰσχίνη, οὔχι 

τοὺς κατορθώσαντας αὐτῶν οὐδὲ τοὺς κρατήσαντας μόνους. 
το δικαίως, ὃ μὲν γὰρ ἦν ἀνδρῶν ἀγαθῶν ἔργον, ἅπασι πέπρα- 
A \ J ᾿ 

κται' τῇ τύχῃ δ᾽ ἣν ὁ δαίμων ἔνειμεν ἑκάστοις, ταύτῃ 
209 κέχρηνται. ἔπειτ᾽, ὦ κατάρατε καὶ γραμματοκύφων, σὺ 
μὲν τῆς παρὰ τουτωνὶ τιμῆς καὶ φιλανθρωπίας ἔμ᾽ ἀποστε- 
ρῆσαι βουλόμενος τρόπαια καὶ μάχας καὶ mahal’ ἔργ᾽ 
ἣν - , 5 70’ ε Ν 5 Ν ε , Ae δὲ 
ἔλεγες, ὧν τίνος προσεδεῖθ᾽' ὁ παρὼν ἀγὼν οὑτοσί; ἐμέ OE, 
ς ὦ τριταγωνιστὰ, τὸν περὶ τῶν πρωτείων σύμβουλον τῇ πόλεις 


Pe eee LS rrr rere rr ΣΣχ 


_ Paus. I. 29, Thuc. Il. 34- 


8. ἢ πόλις ὁμοίως Al. 


i, Lips. 10. ἀγαθῶν ἀνδρῶν V6. 
12. κέχρηται V6. 
8 209. 1. γραμματοκυφῶν Σ. 2. 


τῶν om. Al. 


τιμῆς ἐθαύμασεν F (yp). 9. 


τούτων V6; τούτοις A2. 


αὐτῶν vulg.; αὐτοὺς Σ, 
rr. ἔνειμεν Σ, L, At; ἀπένειμεν vulg. a 


5. τὸν om. A2. 


gt (Bergk), Ἑλλήνων προμαχοῦντες ; Ar. 
Vesp. 987, σοῦ mpoudxera. But the fre- 
quent use of ὑπέρ with such genitives makes 
plain the other force of mpo-; as Isoc. 
IV. 75, τοὺς τοῖς σώμασιν ὑπὲρ THs Ελλάδος 
προκινδυνεύσαντας, and Lys. XVIII. 27; 
τῶν ὑπὲρ τῆς ἐλευθερίας προκεκινδυν ευκό- 
των, where the meaning is the same as 
in the present passage. See also 1]. XI. 
217, ἔθελεν δὲ πολὺ προμάχεσθαι ἁπάντων, 
to fight far in the front of all, and XVII. 
358, προμάχεσθαι ᾿Αχαιῶν ἔξοχον ἄλλων 
(cf. vss. 357—359), with the same force 
of mpo-. In our passage προκινδυνεύω is 
used absolutely.—MapaSovi: as the name 
of an Attic deme, this is usually a locative 
dative; but here all Mss. except 2, and 
most quotations, prefix ἐν. 

5. ἐν Σαλαμῖνι : this battle was fought 
at Salamis; the other sea-fight was off 
(ἐπ᾿) Artemisium. The two land-battles 
are mentioned first, and then the two sea- 
fights in the order of importance. 

6. ϑημοσίοις μνήμασι: the pudlic 
tombs were in the outer Ceramicus, on 
the road leading to the Academy: see 
Those who 


fell at Marathon were buried on the — 
battlefield, as a special honour. s 

7. ἀγαθοὺς ἄνδρας, in apposition with 
the preceding accusatives: this was by ¥ 
no means a weak term of praise with 
Demosthenes: cf. 1. το.--ὁμοίως and 
τῆς αὐτῆς mutually strengthen each 
other. ‘ ἽΝ. 
9. αὐτῶν: I adopt this partitive gen. — | 
rather than αὐτούς (found in 3, 1.1), as 1 
am not convinced that αὐτούς can havé © 
the force of especially (distinguished from 
others), ipsos solos (Rauchenstein): see 
Vomel’s note. In. defence of English, — 
we may note that this renowned passage, 
perhaps the most effective ever spoken by 
an orator, has no less than fifty s¢gaas in 
sixty-seven words. ἥν, 

§ 209. The descent from the im- 
passioned patriotic eloquence of the 
preceding passage to the personal vitu- 
peration of this is depressing. 

I. γραμματοκύφων : ἀντὶ τοῦ ; 
ματέως, ὅτι οἱ γραμματεῖς προκεκυφότες 
γράφουσιν (Etym. Magn.). Cf. § 261%. 

3. τρόπαια... ἔλεγες : see Aesch. 181. 

5. τριταγωνιστὰ: effectively choser 


TTEPI 


» θανον. 


/ 
x 
| ὥ 6. ἀναλαβόντα At. Vp 
§ 210. 2. 
(5. ἔργ. καὶ νόμων O. 8. 


τς ΜΙ reference to πρωτείων, which refers 

to Athens as competitor for the first 

prize in the political ἀγών, in which 

ΙΝ Demosthenes is her adviser. 

le 6. τὸ τίνος φρόνημα λαβόντ᾽, ἐ7:- 

|; spired by whose spirit? Our language 

Ϊ generally refuses to translate an interro- 

___ gative or relative with a participle or 

| infinitive: we may say wth whose spirit 

| should I have been inspired when etc.? 

: 8 210. τ. δικαίως μέντἂν ἀπέθανον, 
but (in that case) 7 should have deserved to 
die. μέντἂν by crasis for μέντοι ἄν: τοι 
ἄν becomes τάν, but whether μέν- should 
retain its accent is doubtful. 

3. διανοίας, spirzt (way of thinking). 
᾿ —t8las, δημοσίας : this has no reference 
__ to the ordinary distinction of γραφαί and 

Bs “δίκαι, public and private sutts, which 
| _ correspond generally to our cvzminal and 
__ etvil processes. Here δίκη has its widest 
legal sense of Jawswit in general, in- 
| eluding both γραφή and δίκη {in its 
Narrower sense). ἴδιαι δίκαι are those 
_ which concern individuals and their ordi- 
nary business relations (συμβόλαια), which 

_ of course must be judged with reference to 

| special statutes (ἐπὶ ἰδίων νόμων, cf. ἐπ᾽ 
τ΄ ἀληθείας, ὃ 221), which may change from 
| = year to year, and 20 sfecial facts (ἰδίων 
|= ἔργων), without regard to the general 
policy or the traditions of the state: even 

:| = criminal suits (γραφαί) which involve 


TOY STEbANOY 


Ν la / 3 4 > > a 
τὰ τῶν προγόνων ἀξιώματ᾽ ἀποβλέποντας. 
/ yg A / Ν A / Ν / Ν 
βάνειν γ᾽ ἅμα τῇ βακτηρίᾳ καὶ τῷ συμβόλῳ τὸ φρόνημα τὸ 
_ τῆς πόλεως νομίζειν ἕκαστον ὑμῶν δεῖ, ὅταν τὰ δημόσι᾽ 
rou om. L?, F, Y, ®. 


ἐπεὶ Σ, L}; ἔπειτα 1, (mg.), vulg. 
det om. O. 


> on nothing more than the rights or acts of 


149 


' παριόντα, τὸ τίνος φρόνημα λαβόντ' ἀναβαίνειν ἐπὶ τὸ Bie 
1 ἔδει; τὸ τοῦ τούτων ἀνάξι ἐροῦντος ; δικαίως μέντἂν ἀπέ. 210 
ἐπεὶ οὐδ᾽ ὑμᾶς, ἄνδρες ᾿Αθηναῖοι, ἀπὸ τῆς αὐτῆς 
διανοίας δεῖ τάς τ᾽ ἰδίας δίκας καὶ τὰς δημοσίας κρίνειν, 
ἀλλὰ τὰ μὲν τοῦ καθ᾽ ἡμέραν βίου συμβόλαια ἐπὶ τῶν ἰδίων 
νόμων καὶ ἔργων σκοποῦντας, τὰς δὲ κοινὰς προαιρέσεις εἰς 5 


καὶ παραλαμ- 


τὸ τοὐϊὸὺ των (in 2 lines) Σ. 
ὦ ἄνδρες Ο; ὦ ᾿Αθηναῖοι At. 


individuals would be included here. But 
δημόσιαι δίκαι are suits like the present 
one, which involve a judgment on the 
general policy of statesmen (κοινὰς προαι- 
ρέσει5), whose acts are not prescribed by 
special statutes, but must be governed to 
a great extent by general principles and 
traditions of state: these, the orator says, 
must be judged by reference to the glorious 
deeds of the past. Demosthenes insists 
here, as elsewhere, that the only real 
question involved in this case is that of 
his own statesmanship and his fidelity 
to the best traditions of Athens, while 
Aeschines constantly urges the court to 
treat it as a common ἰδία δίκη and settle 
it by reference to ordinary facts and petty 
details. (See Aesch. 199, 200.) Aeschi- 
nes saw that here lay his only chance of 
success in his suit. 

7. τῇ βακτηρίᾳ καὶ τῷ συμβόλῳ, 
his staff and his ticket: each judge, who 
was appointed to sit in any court for the 
day, received in the morning a staff painted 
with the same colour as the lintel (σφη- 
vioxos) of the court house in which he 
was to sit; after entering the court, he 
gave up his staff to an officer, who gave 
him a ticket (σύμβολον), which entitled 
him to receive his fee of three obols (δι- 
καστικόν) after his day’s service. See 
Arist. Pol. Ath. 63’ and col. 323-15, with 
Sandys’s notes; Meier and Schémann, 
pp- 160—162.—dpovrjpa: see § 209°. 


150 AHMOSOENOY> 


Sin a ¥ ed 3 , , ΕΝ 
ELOLYTE κρινουντές, ELTTEP αξι EKELY WV πράττειν οἴεσθε 


10 χρῆναι. | 


211 


ὃ 


212 


᾿Αλλὰ γὰρ ἐμπεσὼν εἰς τὰ πεπραγμένα τοῖς προγόνοις 
ὑμῶν ἔστιν ἃ τῶν ψηφισμάτων παρέβην καὶ τῶν πραχθέντων. 
ἐπανελθεῖν οὖν ὁπόθεν ἐνταῦθ᾽ ἐξέβην βούλομαι. ᾿ 

Ὡς γὰρ ἀφικόμεθ᾽ εἰς τὰς Θήβας, κατελαμβάνομεν Φι- 


λίππου καὶ Θετταλῶν καὶ τῶν ἄλλων συμμάχων παρόντας, 
΄) \ δ \ ε , , 3 , \ > ᾿ 
πρέσβεις, καὶ τοὺς μὲν ἡμετέρους φίλους ἐν φόβῳ, τοὺς © 
ἐκείνου θρασεῖς. ὅτι δ᾽ οὐ νῦν ταῦτα λέγω τοῦ συμφέροντος 
EVEK € Ds Ae ὴν ἐπιστολὴν ἣν TOT ἐπέμψαμεν ἢ 
Vek ἐμαυτῷ, λέγε μοι τὴν ἐπιστολὴν ἣν πέμψαμεν 
: 


3 \ ε 4 , rd . 3 A - 
εὐθὺς οἱ πρέσβεις. καίτοι τοσαύτῃ γ᾽ ὑπερβολῇ συκοφαντίας 
οὗτος κέχρηται ὥστ᾽, εἰ μέν τι τῶν δεόντων ἐπράχθη, τὸν 
καιρὸν, οὐκ ἐμέ φησιν αἴτιον γεγενῆσθαι, τῶν δ᾽ ὡς ἑτέρως 
συμβάντων ἁπάντων ἐμὲ καὶ τὴν ἐμὴν τύχην αἰτίαν εἶναι" 

Ν ε ¥ ε ᾽ὔ Ν CaF: > Ν ὮΝ \ > / 
Kal, ὡς ἔοικεν, ὁ σύμβουλος καὶ ῥήτωρ ἐγὼ τῶν μὲν EK λόγου 

Ἂ “ , , SON > A id 
καὶ τοῦ βουλεύσασθαι πραχθέντων οὐδὲν αὐτῷ συναίτιος 

oa σι A foal J Ν 
εἶναι δοκῶ, τῶν δ᾽ ἐν τοῖς ὅπλοις καὶ κατὰ τὴν στρατηγίαν 


9. εἰσιῆτε Al. οἴεσθαι Σ. 

ὃ 211. 1. ἐκπεσὼν Α2. 3. ὁπόθεν Σ, = (yp), L; ὅθεν vulg. ἐνταῦθ᾽ Σ, L; 
εἰς ταῦτα Σ (yp), vulg. 4. κατελαμβάνομεν Σ, L, Ar; καταλαμβ. vulg. 6. μὲν 
om. Νό.͵ ὑμετ. Νό. 7. ἐκείνων A2. θαρσεῖς Ο. 

8 212. 2. οὑτοσὶ O; om. V6. 3. γεγενῆσθαι (ν᾽. late +) 2. 5. ὁ ῥήτωρ Ol. 


6. βουλεύεσθαι Y. οὐδὲν 2; οὐδενὸς L, vulg. 7. καὶ (before κατὰ) om. L. 


§ 211. He now returns to the ac- Δημοσθένη, τούτοις συμμαχεῖν ἐψηφίσαντο. 


count of the embassy to Thebes, from 
which he digressed in § 188. 

4. ἀφικόμεθ᾽ : 1.6. the ambassadors.— 
Pidttrov...mpérPers: see Plut. Dem. 18, 
ἔπεμψε δὲ (sc. els Θήβας) καὶ Φίλιππος, 
ὡς Μαρσύας φησὶν, ᾿Αμύνταν μὲν καὶ 
Κλέαρχον Μακεδόνας, Δάοχον δὲ Θετταλὸν 
καὶ Θρασυδαῖον, ἀντεροῦντας (sc. Δημο- 
σθένει). ᾿ 

5. συμμάχων : see Philocth. frag. 135, 
Φιλίππου δὲ καταλαβόντος ᾿Βλάτειαν καὶ 
Κυτίνιον, καὶ πρέσβεις πέμψαντος εἰς Θήβας 
Θετταλῶν, Αἰνιανῶν, Αἰτωλῶν, Δολόπων, 
Φθιωτῶν: ᾿Αθηναίων δὲ κατὰ τὸν αὐτὸν 
χρόνον πρέσβεις ἀποστειλάντων τοὺς περὶ 


8. ἣν τότ᾽ ἐπέμψαμεν: opposed to 
νῦν λέγω (7). 

§ 212. These words were spoken — 
while the clerk was preparing to read the 
letter: cf. § 180. > | 

2. τὸν καιρὸν: see Aesch. 137—141 
and 237—239; esp. ὁ δ᾽ εἰσάγων ἦν ὑμᾶς 
εἰς τὰς Θήβας καιρὸς καὶ φόβος, καὶ χρεία ᾿ 
συμμαχίας, ἀλλ᾽ οὐ Δημοσθένης (141). = 

᾿ 


3. ὡς ἑτέρως: see note on ὃ 85°. 

4. τύχην: see Aesch. 157. 

6. συναίτιος, partner, opposed to μόνος 
αἴτιος (8). 

7. TOV... ἀτυχηθέντων -- ἃ ἠτυχήσα- 
MeV. 


as - ες ἄπο, δ aie 


ΠΕΡῚ TOY STEPANOY 151 


3 7 x > aA ae 
ἀτυχηθέντων μόνος QAlTLOS ELWAL. τως AV WHOTEPOS συκο- 


ΐ ,ὕ , > x , , N 9 τι 
| φάντης γένοιτ᾽ ἢ καταρατότερος; λέγε τὴν ἐπιστολήν. 
ἘΠΙΣΤΟΛΗ. 

3 \ / > / \ > ,ὕ an AS 
Ἐπειδὴ τοίνυν ἐποιήσαντο τὴν ἐκκλησίαν, προσῆγον 818 

ἐκείνους προτέρους διὰ τὸ τὴν τῶν συμμάχων τάξιν ἐκείνους 

¥ ἊΝ / "ὃ / λλὰ N rv 

ἔχειν. καὶ παρελθόντες ἐδημηγόρουν πολλὰ μὲν Φίλιππον 

᾿ς ἐγκωμιάζοντες, πολλὰ δ᾽ ὑμῶν κατηγοροῦντες, πάνθ᾽ ὅσα 


299 


3 A} 4> 3 τ nd 3 4 XV 
πώποτ᾽ ἐναντί᾽ ἐπράξατε Θηβαίοις ἀναμιμνήσκοντες. τὸ 5 

5 > , 9 "2 τς Ν > / ε - , 

ὧδ᾽ οὖν κεφάλαιον, ἠξίουν ὧν μὲν εὖ πεπόνθεσαν ὑπὸ Φιλίππου 
4 5 Ἂς 3 ὃ ἴω φ' δ᾽ ε > ε la AOL OL 

χάριν αὑτοὺς ἀποῦουναι, ὧν ὑφ᾽ ὑμῶν ἠδίκηντο δίκην 
| d A ε , aN x ὃ , ε Ν ΑΕ Ε ΟΝ x 
aBew, ὁποτέρως βούλονται, ἢ διέντας αὑτοὺς ἐφ᾽ ὑμᾶς ἢ 

’ὔ 3 δὴ 3 ia \ 25 ’ὔ ε ν 
συνεμβαλόντας εἰς τὴν Αττικήν"} καὶ ἐδείκνυσαν, ὡς WOVTO, 


> Ν “- > εὖ ͵7 3 A 3 wn , 
EK μὲν ὧν αὐτοὶ συνεβούλευον τὰκ τῆς Αττικῆς βοσκήματα το 


9. γένοιτο Σ, L; γένοιτ᾽ ἂν vulg. καταρατώτερος At, O. τούτου (after καταρ.) 


vule.; om. 2, L, Ar. 


§ 218. 1. τὴν ἐκκλησίαν: 1.6. at 
Thebes. The narrative is continued from 
5.2 ΤΥ: ἶ 

2. τῶν συμμάχων: i.e. of Thebes. 

5. τὸ κεφάλαιον, adverbial, 77 short. 

6. ὧν μὲν εὖ πεπόνθεσαν, for the 
benefits they had received, εὖ πάσχειν 
being the passive of εὖ ποιεῖν: this cor- 
responds to ὧν δ᾽ ἠδίκηντο (7). 

7. αὐτοὺς: the Thebans, while αὐτοὺς 


in 8 refers to the Macedonians. 


8. ὁποτέρως βούλονται, 27 whichever 
way they pleased, in the mood and tense 
of the direct form, the exhortation being 
take vengeance in whichever way you 
please. ὁποτέρως βούλοιντο might have 
been used: but this might stand for ὁπο- 
Tépws ἂν βούλησθε (future).—B8révTas av- 


“τοὺς, i.e. dy letting them pass through 


Boeotia into Attica. The aorists διέντας 
and συνεμβαλόντας have the better au- 
thority here: when an aor. partic. denotes 


ὃ 218. 2. 7dom. Y. 3. δὲ (for μὲν) Az. 4 πάνθ 2, 1, vA 

, ἅπανθ᾽ vulg. 5. πράξαντες Y. 6. εὖ πεπόνθασιν Al; ξυπεπονθεσαν Σ; 
εὔπεπόνθ. 1,. αὐτοῖς Ar, F. ἀποδιδόναι Β. ὑφ᾽ om. O. ἡμῶν A2. 
ἠδίκηντο L.; ἠδίκηνται XZ? (αι corr.), vulg. δίκην above line, nearly obliterated, =. 
8. βούλεται At. διέντας D, L, Y, V6, F, Φ, Bt; duévras vulg. αὐτοὺς L, 
vulg.; αὐτοὺς 2; αὑτοὺς Bk. ἡμᾶς ®, Ar. 9. συνεμβάλλοντας F!; συμβαλ- 
λόντας O; συμβαλόντας A2. Io. ἐκ om. A2. αὐτοῖς F, (corr. to αὐτοὶ) B. 


that in which the action of a verb (usually 
aorist) consists, so that they really de- 
signate one act, the two may coincide in 
time, as in Plat. Phaed. 60 c, εὖ γ᾽ 
ἐποίησας ἀναμνήσας με, you did well 
to remind me. (See M.T. 150, with 
the examples.) One of the arguments 
used to persuade the Thebans is given 
by Aristotle (Rhet. 11, 23%): καὶ πάλιν 
πρὸς τοὺς Θηβαίους διεῖναι Φίλιππον eis 
τὴν ᾿Αττικὴν, ὅτι ““εἰ πρὶν βοηθῆσαι εἰς 
Φωκεῖς ἠξίου, ὑπέσχοντο ἀν" ἄτοπον οὖν εἰ 
διότι προεῖτο καὶ ἐπίστευσε μὴ διήσουσιν᾽": 
i.e. if Philip had asked for a passage 
through Boeotia before he helped the 


‘Thebans against the Phocians (in 346 


B.c.), they would have granted it; it 
would be absurd now for them to refuse 
it because he had thrown away that 
opportunity, trusting in their good faith 
(for the future). (See Cope’s note.) 

10. ἐκ μὲν.. συνεβούλευον, as a con- 


152 AHMOZOENOY> 


καὶ ἀνδράποδα Kal TaN’ ἀγαθὰ εἰς THY Βοιωτίαν ἥξοντα, ἐκ 
3 - ἴω ἴων ἴων 
δ᾽ ὧν ἡμᾶς ἐρεῖν ἔφασαν τἀν τῇ Βοιωτίᾳ διαρπασθησόμεν᾽ 
ε SS ἴω οι» Ν A Ν Ν & 3 Ἂν; 
ὑπὸ τοῦ πολέμου. καὶ ἀλλα πολλὰ πρὸς τούτοις, εἰς ταὐτὰ 
214 δὲ πάντα συντείνοντ᾽, ἔλεγον. 


a 


aA Jee ~ Ν la Ν 
ἃ δ᾽ ἡμεῖς πρὸς ταῦτα, τὰ 
mA ᾿ Tag pry ¥.( ps tree ~~ , “Oa 
‘+ μὲν καθ᾽ ἕκαστα ἐγὼ μὲν ἀντὶ παντὸς ἂν τιμησαίμην εἰπεῖν 
ω ’, ε ~ Ν ’, Ἦν, ἊΣ / a ~ 
Tov βίου, ὑμᾶς δὲ δέδοικα, μὴ παρεληλυθότων τῶν καιρῶν, 
ν lat ~ 
ὥσπερ ἂν εἰ Kal κατακλυσμὸν γεγενῆσθαι τῶν πραγμάτων 
ε ; 
5 ἡγούμενοι, μάταιον ὄχλον τοὺς περὶ τούτων λόγους νομίσητε" 


| 
| 
ἷ 
: 


13. πολλὰ πολλα >. 


ταυτα Σ; ταῦτα L, vulg.; ταὐτὰ A2, V6, Bk. 


§ 214. 1. ταῦτα Σ', εἵπομεν (above line) 22; ταῦτα εἴπομεν At; ταῦτα ἀντείπομεν 


vulg., τ. ἀντείπαμεν F, Y, O3 ἀντείπομεν πρὸς ταῦτα L. 2. 
εἰ καὶ Z; ef L, vulg. 


vulg.; τιμησαίμην B', τιμ. ἂν Β2. a 
5. ἡγούμενοι before γεγενῆσθαι A2. 


- 


sequence of following their advice, opposed 
to ἐκ δ᾽ ὧν ἡμᾶς ἐρεῖν ἔφασαν. The argu- 
ments here given are of the gross material 
kind which were generally supposed to 
have weight at Thebes. Demosthenes 
(§ 214) seems to imply that his own argu- 
ments were of a higher character. 

§ 214. 1. ἃ δ᾽ ἡμεῖς: sc. ἐλέγομεν 
(see crit. note).—tTd μὲν καθ᾽ ἕκαστα, 
the details, with the subordinate ἐγὼ μὲν 
and ὑμᾶς δὲ, is in antithesis to 6 τι δ᾽ οὖν 
ἐπείσαμεν (i.e. the sum of what we ac- 
complished) inl. 6. . 

2. ἀντὶ... τοῦ βίου, as we might say, 7 
would give my life: cf. τιμᾶν and τιμᾶσθαι 
used of estimating the penalty in a law- 
suit; and I. 1, ἀντὶ πολλῶν ἂν χρημάτων 
ἑλέσθαι. Τί 15 not hard to see why Demos- 
thenes should be unwilling to repeat any 
part of this brilliant speech. The hope 
of brilliant successes of the allies against 
Philip, which he probably held out, had 
been disappointed by the crushing defeat 
at Chaeronea; and the destruction of 
Thebes three years later must have made 
the whole tone of this speech now sadly 
untimely. Plutarch (Dem. 18) gives a 
graphic account of the Theban assembly 
and of the address, which was probably 
one of the orator’s greatest efforts: τὸ μὲν 
οὖν συμφέρον οὐ διέφευγε τοὺς τῶν Θηβαίων 


ἂν τιμησαίμην Σ,1,, 
κατακλεισμὸν Ο. 


λογισμοὺς, ἀλλ᾽ ἐν ὄμμασιν ἕκαστος εἶχε τὰ 
τοῦ πολέμου δεινὰ, ἔτι τῶν Φωκικῶν τραυ- 
μάτων νεαρῶν παραμενόντων " ἡ δὲ τοῦ 
ῥήτορος δύναμις, ὡς φησι Θεόπομπος, ἐκρι- 
πίζουσα τὸν θυμὸν αὐτῶν καὶ διακαίουσα 
τὴν φιλοτιμίαν ἐπεσκότησε τοῖς ἄλλοις 
ἅπασιν, ὥστε καὶ φόβον καὶ λογισμὸν καὶ 
χάριν ἐκβαλεῖν αὐτοὺς ἐνθουσιῶντας ὑπὸ 
τοῦ λόγου πρὸς τὸ καλόν. οὕτω δὲ μέγα 
καὶ λαμπρὸν ἐφάνη τὸ τοῦ ῥήτορος ἔργον 
ὥστε τὸν μὲν Φίλιππον εὐθὺς ἐπικηρυκεύ- 
εσθαι δεόμενον εἰρήνης. (The last sentence 
refers to the proposals for peace of which 
Aeschines speaks in III. 148—151.) 

4. ὥσπερ ἀν εἰ.. ἡγούμενοι, as (you 
would think, ἐνομίζετε av) if you believed 


(εἰ ἡγεῖσθε), etc. (M.T. 227, 868). Strictly. 


we should have either ὥσπερ ἂν εἰ ἡγεῖσθε 
(impf.) or ὥσπερ ἂν ἡγούμενοι (=el ἣ γ- 
ei Ge), since a conditional participle is not 
regularly preceded by ef (M.T. 472). 
But it would seem that the colloquial use 
of ὥσπερ ἂν εἰ (or ὡσπερανεί), guasi, some- 
times caused the true ellipsis to be over- 
looked and the εἰ to be irregularly added. 
Somewhat analogous is the use of οὕνεκα 
(ov ἕνεκα) as a preposition for évexa.—kal 


κατακλυσμὸν; 1.6. also a deluge, as well © 


as the lapse of opportunity (παρεληλυθότων 
τῶν καιρῶν) : see West.—tav πραγμάτων, 
objective genitive after κατακλυσμὸν. 


> 


| || ΠΕΡΙ 


᾿ λέγε ταυτὶ λαβών. 


Ν lanl x \ , 
και γυναικας και τὰ TLULLWTATO. 


6. ὅτι Σ, L (yp mg.); ἃ L, vulg. 


TOY STEDANOY 


153 


6 Tl δ᾽ οὖν ἐπείσαμεν ἡμεῖς καὶ ἡμῖν ἀπεκρίναντο, ἀκούσατε. 


ΑΠΟΚΡΙΣΕΙ͂Σ OHBAION. 


Μετὰ ταῦτα τοίνυν ἐκάλουν ὑμᾶς καὶ μετεπέμποντο. 215 


- 


᾿ ἐξῆτε, ἐβοηθεῖτε, i ἵνα τὰν μέσῳ παραλείπω, οὕτως οἰκείως 

| 300 ὑμᾶς ἐδέχοντο, ὥστ᾽ ἔξω τῶν ὁπλιτῶν καὶ τῶν ἱππέων ὄντων 
by > x aes 4 \ Cee ὅπ A 

ELS TAS οἰκίας καὶ TO ἀστυ δέχεσθαι τὴν στρατιὰν ἐπὶ παῖδας 


’ 43 > > be “ 
KQLTOL T pl εν €KELV?) ΤΊ) 5 


καὶ ἃ ἡμῖν L, vulg. (V6 ὑμῖν) ; dom. = 


7. Tavri Z, L, &, V6; ταῦτα Ar; τουτὶ vulg. 


§ 215. 1. ἡμᾶς V6. 2. 
μὰ πο, 8]. τὰ Y. 


παραλίπω L, F, &, Y. 2: 


é&nre 2, L, F, &, V6, O13; ἐξηείτε Ar. 2. τὰν 2, 


ἡμᾶς V6. 


6. ὅτι.. ἀπεκρίναντο (omitting ἅ with 
᾿ Σ): 6 τι ἐπείσαμεν and 6 τι ἀπεκρίναντο 
_ are the same thing. . 
| § 215. 1. ἐκάλουν ὑμᾶς : this is what 
Demosthenes provided for in § 178” 3 (see 

_ notes), when he proposed to give the 

embassy concurrent power with the 

_ generals over the movements of the army. 

_ This march to Thebes, after the answer 

of the Thebans had been sent to Athens 
(wera ταῦτα), is commonly thought to 
‘lige be directly opposed to the account of 
_ Aeschines in III. 140: Dissen exclaims in- 
_ dignantly, ‘‘ Haeccine manifesta mendacia 
_ potuisse coram judicibus dici!” But 
-Aeschines says only that the march to 
TI ebes took place πρὶν περὶ συμμαχίας 
μίαν μόνην συλλαβὴν γράψαι Δημοσθένην. 
ἔπον that the decree of Demosthenes 
ἕω (181—187), which provided for συμμαχίαν 
καὶ ἐπιγαμίαν (1), 15 known to bea forgery, 
3 we have no reason for thinking that any 
formal treaty of alliance preceded the 
invitation of the Athenian army to Thebes. 
Certainly the reply (dmé«picis) just men- 
tioned implied no such treaty, which 
mosthenes could have proposed only 
his return to Athens. It appears 
ym the criticisms of Aeschines on the 
ns of the treaty (141—144) that it was 
elaborate document; and it is pro- 
6 that it was not made and ratified 
il some time after the march to Thebes, 
lich required no further legislation than 


the decree appointing the ambassadors 
(§ 188). It must be remembered that 
Demosthenes (§ 178) proposed that the 
embassy should simply offer the Athenian 
army to Thebes without insisting on any 
formal terms, ἐπαγγέλλεσθαι βοηθήσειν ἂν 
κελεύωσιν. : 

3. ἔξω... ὄντων: this is commonly re- 
ferred to the Athenian army, who are 
supposed to have first encamped outside 
the city and afterwards to have been 
invited to enter Thebes and occupy the 
houses. . It is surely far more natural and 
agrees better with the context to under- 
stand that, while the Theban infantry 
and cavalry (i.e. the whole army) were 
encamped outside the walls, ready for a 
march, the Athenian army was quartered 
in the town. The lack of a pronoun to 
designate which army is meant is felt in 
both interpretations; but as the subject is 
the Thebans, it is more natural to refer 
the absolute clause to them. Again, the 
emphasis given twice to παῖδας καὶ yuvat- 


‘kas (4 and 11) implies that the men were 


absent ; and ἐφ᾽ ὑμῖν ποιήσαντες (12), as 
a testimony to the σωφροσύνη of the 
Athenians, implies this still more strongly. 
And yet the words in dispute are the only 
possible reference to this absence in the 
whole passage. Indeed, rather than refer 
ἔξω... ὄντων to the Athenians, we should 
almost feel justified in supplying some 
word like ἑαυτῶν or Θηβαίων (in 3). 


10 


216 


wn 


154 AHMOZOENOYS 


aA “A ae “A 
ἡμέρᾳ πᾶσιν ἀνθρώποις ἔδειξαν ἐγκώμια Θηβαῖοι kal ὑμῶν 
a g / 
τὰ κάλλιστα, ἕν μὲν ἀνδρείας, ἕτερον δὲ δικαιοσύνης, τρίτον 
Ν , ie.’ \ εἶ 3 ‘al 7 ae la ἴω “Ὁ 
δὲ σωφροσύνης. καὶ γὰρ τὸν ἀγῶνα pe ὑμῶν μᾶλλον ἢ 
laa > ‘ 
πρὸς ὑμᾶς ἑλόμενοι ποιήσασθαι, καὶ ἀμείνους εἶναι καὶ 
la κι Ν Ν 3 
δικαιότερ᾽ ἀξιοῦν ὑμᾶς ἔκριναν Φιλίππου: καὶ τὰ παρ 
ε a \ \ aA δ᾽ 3 / a ' τὸ Ν 
αὑτοῖς καὶ παρὰ πᾶσι δ᾽ ἐν πλείστῃ φυλακῇ, παῖδας καὶ 
A A \ 
γυναῖκας, ἐφ᾽ ὑμῖν ποιήσαντες, σωφροσύνης πίστιν περὶ 
caer Ὁ ἢν » > aq A » 3 A , 
ὑμῶν ἔχοντες ἔδειξαν. ἐν οἷς πᾶσιν, ἄνδρες ᾿Αθηναῖοι, κατά 
δ €or 3 A > ΄ > / » Ν > Ἁ ΄ 
γ᾽ ὑμᾶς ὀρθῶς ἐφάνησαν ἐγνωκότες. οὔτε γὰρ εἰς τὴν πόλιν. 
5 / “A ᾽’ 3 Ν 5 \ > 2 es / ε “ 
εἰσελθόντος τοῦ στρατοπέδου οὐδεὶς οὐδὲν οὐδ᾽ ἀδίκως ὑμῖν 
3 , y , ἢ ΄ > C. eS 3 , OL 
ἐνεκάλεσεν: οὕτω σώφρονας παρέσχεθ᾽ ὑμᾶς αὐτούς" ols 
TE συμπαραταξάμενοι τὰς πρώτας, τήν T ἐπὶ τοῦ ποταμοῦ 


6. περὶ ὑμῶν Ar. 2; περὶ ἡμῶν V6. 
μεθ᾽ ὑμῶν) Σ. 10. 
αὐτοῖς L, vulg.; ἁυτοῖς Q; αὑτοῖς Bk. 


Φιλίππου LZ, L, Ar. 2, B; ἢ Φίλιππον vulg. Il. 
αὐτοῖς δὲ καὶ τὰ παρὰ πᾶσιν ἐν Ax (see Lips.) ; 


μᾶλλον μεθ᾽ ὑμῶν (i.e. μᾶλλον to follow 
αυτοῖς Σ; 


αὐτοῖς καὶ τὰ παρὰ πᾶσι δὲ ἐν O; αὐτοῖς καὶ παρὰ πάσι δὲ ἐν Σ. 


8 216. τ. 


παρέσχετε Σ, L, At; παρέσχεσθε vulg. 


5. τὰς πρώτας μάχας vulg.; μάχας om. Ζ- 


πᾶσιν Σ,1,, ΑΙ. 23 ἅπασιν vulg. 3. 


Bk. Anecd. 160, Bk., Dind., West., Lips.; τοῦ om. 2, Vom., BI. ΕἾ 


τοῦ στρατ. L, vulg., 
ἐκάλεσεν Ο. 
ὑμᾶς ἁυτόυς Σ, V6 (also in line 6). 

τήν τ 2, L, Ars 7? om. vile, 


6. καθ᾽ ὑμῶν, upon you, as in VI. 9, 
καθ᾽ ὑμῶν ἐγκώμιον, not in its common 
hostile sense. See Arist. Pol. 111. 13, 14, 
κατὰ δὲ τοιούτων οὐκ ἔστι νόμος, αὐτοὶ yap 
εἰσι νόμος, 172 respect to (Ὁ) such men there 
ἧς mo law, for they are a law unto 
themselves. In the parallel passage of 
St Paul, Gal. v. 23, κατὰ τῶν τοιούτων is 
translated against such, adversus (Vul- 
gate), wzdexr solche (Luther), perhaps 
wrongly. See Rom. ii. 14, ἑαυτοῖς εἰσι 
νόμος, where we have the rest of the 
passage of Aristotle. 

10. δικαιότερ᾽ ἀξιοῦν, shat you made 
juster claims on them. 

tI. καὶ παρὰ πᾶσι δ᾽, and indeed 
(καὶ) wth all mankind, parenthetically 
after map’ αὐτοῖς. 

13. ἔχοντες (representing ἔχομεν) : 07’. 
obl. with ἔδειξαν. 

ὃ 216. 2. ὀρθῶς ἐφάνησαν ἐγνω- 
κότες, 12 appeared (later) that they had 
judged rightly (éyvwxacw): cf. § 215%.— 
οὔτε.. οὐδεὶς οὐδὲν οὐδ᾽: a remarkable 


accumulation of emphatic negatives : οὔτε 
corresponds to τε (5). , 

3. οὐδ᾽ ἀδίκως (not) even unjustly. 

4. δίς τε... πρώτας, when you twice 
stood in line with them tn the earliest 
encounters: some cognate object is im- 
plied in συμπαραταξάμενοι: cf. §§ 208%, 
2874. All Mss. except 2 add μάχας, as 
if μαχεσάμενοι had preceded. The natural 


accus. would be παρατάξεις, following the. 


meaning of συμπαραταξάμενοι and so signi- 
fying battle array or battles. See Aesch. 
Ill. 151, ἐπὶ τὴν παράταξιν ὥρμησαν. 
West. and Bl. follow Rehdantz, and take 
παρατάξεις (implied) in the sense of 
military maneuvres or arrangements of 
troops, by which Philip’s advance into 
Boeotia was checked without pitched 
battles. 


givings would follow such manoeuvres, 
unless some victory resulted. (See §§ 217, 
218.) 

5. τήν τ᾽ ἐπὶ τοῦ ποταμοῦ, che river 
battle, probably fought on the upper — 


But it is unlikely that thanks- — 


he 


ΟΝ ΠΕΡῚ TOY ΣΤΕΦΑΝΟῪΥ 155 


ee \ \ > Si ee ᾿ δα νει 3. Ν 3 Ν 
᾿ καὶ τὴν χειμερινὴν, οὐκ ἀμέμπτους μόνον ὑμᾶς αὐτοὺς ἀλλὰ 
Ν ἊΝ 5 / a / A lal lan 
καὶ θαυμαστοὺς ἐδείξατε τῷ κόσμῳ, ταῖς παρασκευαῖς, TH 

᾽ὔὕ > > 2) \ εἶ ἴω A ε “A 5 / > 
προθυμίᾳ. ἐφ᾽ ois παρὰ μὲν τῶν ἄλλων ὑμῖν eyiyvorT . 
" \ ~ Ther , \ \ A A Reece 
€TALVOL, παρα ὑμῶν θυσίαι καὶ πομπαὶ τοῖς θεοῖς. [κ 217 
»»» δον , x > ἴω > ᾽ ν Lo ee , 4 
ἔγωγ᾽ ἡδέως av ἐροίμην Αἰσχίνην, ὅτε ταῦτ᾽ ἐπράττετο Kat < 

Ν ἐν 
ζήλου καὶ χαρᾶς καὶ ἐπαίνων ἡ πόλις ἣν μεστὴ, πότερον 
Ν rg la a) 
συνέθυε καὶ συνευφραίνετο τοῖς πολλοῖς, ἢ λυπούμενος καὶ 


\ , » a lanl ΕΣ -΄Ο 
στένων καὶ δυσμεναίνων τοις KOLVOLS ἀγαθοῖς οἴκοι καθῆτο. 5— 
i ΑΙ Ν lan Ν Ν lan yxy | σι 
jet μὲν yap παρὴν καὶ μετὰ τῶν ἄλλων ἐξητάζετο, πῶς οὐ 
ἃς “ ἴω > 3Q9 Ψ 5 “ e 5 / ee! 
εινὰ ποιεῖ, μᾶλλον δ᾽ οὐδ᾽ ὅσια, εἰ ὧν ὡς ἀρίστων αὐτὸς 
Ν 4 ,ὔ ἴω 3 » ἴω 
᾿ τοὺς θεοὺς ἐποιήσατο μάρτυρας, ταῦθ᾽ ὡς οὐκ ἀριστα νῦν 
| aa ee A 3 A , \ 3 ,ὕ \ , 3 Q 
301 ὑμᾶς ἀξιοῖ ψηφίσασθαι τοὺς ὀμωμοκότας τοὺς θεούς ἢ εἰ δὲ 
. \ ta a 9 3 ΄ , $a0-2N At 
μὴ Tapnv, πῶς οὐκ ἀπολωλέναι πολλάκις ἐστὶ δίκαιος, εἶ τὸ 
9. ἡμῶν Y. 
§ 217. 2. émpdrrere At. 3. ζήλων V6. ἡ πόλις ἣν Σ, L, Al; ἣν ἡ 
πόλις vulg. 4. καὶ ouvevdpaivero om. Az. ‘** Laur S folium hoc (incipiens - 


Ὁ 
ὟΣ: 
a 


ny 


| 


Ὑ 
ε 
|’ 


per καὶ στένων) 156> alio atramento et fortasse alia manu scriptum est.” 


5. ἐπὶ Τοῖς vulg.; ἐπὶ om. 2, L}, Ar. 


αὐτὸς 2, L, Ar, B; αὐτοὺς vulg. 8. 


Cephisus, which flows through Phocis 
before it enters Boeotia near Chaeronea. 
6. τὴν χειμερινὴν, the “ winter battle,”’ 
probably fought on some wintry day in 
the hilly parts of Phocis. Many editors 
still find chronological difficulties in this 
winter campaign, forgetting that the only 
trouble arose from the spurious decree 
in §§ 181—187, dated in midsummer. See 
Hist.§ 78. This reference to two definite 
encounters seems to make the common 
interpretation of τὰς πρώτας (5) certain. 
8. παρὰ μὲν τῶν ἄλλων ὑμῖν is in 
strong (double) antithesis to παρὰ δ᾽ ὑμῶν 


᾿ς Τοῖς θεοῖς. 


* 


iy 
‘el 


§$ 217. 3. 
note on § 120°. 

6. μετὰ... ἐξετάζετο, was counted in 
with the rest, the same military figure 
which is common in this speech: see 
note on ὃ 173%. 

7. οὐδ᾽ ὅσια, even impious. 

7,8. ws ἀρίστων... ὡς οὐκ ἄριστα: 
with reference to the words of Ctesi- 
phon’s decree, ὅτι διατελεῖ καὶ λέγων καὶ 
πράττων τὰ ἄριστα τῷ δήμῳ (Aesch. 49). 


ζήλου, pride, glory: see 


Vomel. 
Bic, mesos (}}: ἀρίστων ὄντων At. 
οὐκ ἄξια At. 9. ὠμομοκότας V6. 


If Aeschines joined in the thanksgivings, 
he declared before the Gods that the 
policy of Demosthenes was good : but he 
now asks the court to declare this not 
good by condemning Ctesiphon. 

9. ὀμωμοκότας : of the Heliastic oath. 

ro. ἀπολωλέναι πολλάκις: cf. XIX. 
110, τρὶς οὐχ ἅπαξ ἀπολωλέναι δίκαιος. 

See Lord Brougham’s note on this 
argument (p. 153). After speaking of 
‘the beauty of the passage,” and ‘‘the 
exquisite diction—the majesty of the 
rhythm—the skilful collocation—the pic- 
turesque description of Aeschines’ dismay 
and skulking from the public rejoicings,” 
he says of the argument: “It is not 
a complete dilemma: a retort is obvious. 
Aeschines has only to embrace the second 
alternative—the second horn—and it 
could never have transfixed him. ‘I did 
remain at home, not mourning over the 
success of your measures, but their wicked- 
ness, etc.’ Nevertheless, there are but 
very few complete dilemmas, and the one 
under consideration is quite good enough 
to pass with an audience in a speech. 


156 ΔΗΛΛΟΣΘΕΝΟῪΣ 


ἐφ᾽ οἷς ἔχαιρον οἱ ἄλλοι, ταῦτ᾽ ἐλυπεῖθ᾽ ὁρῶν; boi δὴ καὶ 
ταῦτα τὰ ψηφίσματά μοι. 


ΨΗΦΙΣΜΑΤΑ ΘΥΣΙΩΝ. 
la al Ἔχ ’, “A » yl δ, 
218 οὐκοῦν ἡμεῖς μὲν ἐν θυσίαις ἦμεν τότε, Θηβαῖοι δ᾽ ev 
la lan ᾿ la rd \ ΄“ 
τῷ Ov ἡμᾶς σεσῶσθαι νομίζειν, καὶ περιειστήκει τοῖς 
,ὕ , a Pe BPG 2. ¥ ὦ 5 ᾿ 
βοηθείας δεήσεσθαι δοκοῦσιν ἀφ᾽ ὧν ἔπραττον οὗτοι, αὐτοὺς 
‘a ἘᾺΝ 3 Ὧν 3 / Je / > \ δ 4 ‘pe 
βοηθεῖν ἑτέροις ἐξ ὧν ἐπείσθητ᾽ ἐμοί. ἀλλὰ μὴν οἵας TOT 
5 / Ν ε / Ν 5 Ψ Ss a“ “τς 
5 ἠφίει φωνὰς ὁ Φίλιππος καὶ ἐν οἵαις ἣν ταραχαῖς ἐπὶ 
nA ἴω la Ξ' > 
τούτοις, ἐκ τῶν ἐπιστολῶν τῶν ἐκείνου 'μαθήσεσθε ὧν εἰς 


» ’ὔ Ν 5 
Πελοπόννησον ἔπεμπεν. καί μοι λέγε ταύτας λαβὼν, Ww 


“πλάνη vulg, 


5 ἃ € > Ν ᾽ὕ Ν ’, Χ , Χ ἴς 
εἰδῆτε ἡ ἐμὴ συνέχεια καὶ πλάνοι καὶ ταλαιπωρίαι ae 


πολλὰ ψηφίσματα, ἃ νῦν οὗτος διέσυρε, τί ἀπειργάσατο.) 


Καίτοι πολλοὶ παρ᾽ ὑμῖν, ἄνδρες ᾿Αθηναῖοι, γεγόνασι 


ῥήτορες ἔνδοξοι καὶ μεγάλοι πρὸ ἐμοῦ, Καλλίστρατος ἐκεῖνος, 


τ. pocom. A2. 


§ πεν 2. τῆς βοηθείας Νό, Β (τοῖς over 77s). 3. νομίζουσιν (for δοκοῦσιν 


vulg. ey 


L (w. δοκοῦσιν above). 


αὐτοὺς 2, L, ΑΙ. 23 αὐτοῖς vulg. 
ἐμοί L; ἐπείσθητέ ἐμοί 2; ἐπείσθητέ μοι vulg. 


4. ἐπείσθητ᾽ 
δ. ws(?) for οἵαις Lt (see Vom.). 


7: ἔπεμπεν (ον corr. A ev) 2; ἔπεμπεν (before εἰς II.) L; ἔπεμψε L?, vulg. 8. εἰδῆτε 


ὅτι δ». drt om. Zt, ' Le; AT 


§ 219. 1. ἡμῖν Y (v over ἢ) F. 


The whole passage would be of certain 
success in our Parliament.” (This quota- 
tion is much abridged.) 

§ 218. 1. ἐν TO...vopllev, 27 the 
belief, corresponding to ἐν θυσίαις, both 
denoting what occupied their minds. 

2. τοῖς. δοκοῦσιν (impf.), Zo those 
who had seemed likely to need help, i.e. 
ourselves. 

3. ἀφ᾽ dv ἔπραττον, in antithesis to 
ἐξ ὧν ἐπείσθητ᾽ ἐμοί: cf. § 213%-?.— 
αὐτοὺς, 22:ος, i.e. ourselves: for the accus. 
see Xen. Oec. I1, 23, συμφέρει, αὐτοῖς 
φίλους εἷναι, where φίλοις would be more 


‘common (ἃ. 928!). 


4. βοηθεῖν ἑτέροις : subj. of περιει- 
στήκει, zt had come about.—olas ἠφίει 


‘devas: cf. ὃ 195%. 


6. ἐπιστολῶν : for an earlier letter of 
Philip to Peloponnesus asking for help, 


συνέχεια καὶ om. A2. 
ἀπειργάσατο (ει corr. from ἡ Ὁ) 2. 
ὦ ἄνδ. ᾽Αθ0. A2; 


πλάνοι >, L, At, Β5; 
ὦ ᾽Αθ. Ar. 


566 8. 156. 

8. πλάνοι refers especially to his 
frequent journeys to Thebes while the 
negotiations were going on, and also to 
his other embassies (cf. § 244). 

9. διέσυρε: see the general ridicule 
of his decrees in Aesch. 111. to0'~%. This 
remark may perhaps refer to the fierce 
criticism of the terms of the alliance with 
Thebes (III. 141—143).—Tl ἀπειργά- 
σατο: the position of τί is emphatic: 
cf. σκέψασθε πῶς, ὃ 2354, We should 
expect συνέχεια etc. to be in the accus. 


by the usual attraction; but they are far 


more expressive as they stand. 
§§ 219—221 were spoken while the 


clerk was preparing to read the letters of 


Philip. 
§ 219. 2. Καλλίστρατος : the famous 
orator whose eloquence is said to have 


TEP! TOY ΣΤΕΦΑΝΟῪΥ 


157 


᾿Αριστοφῶν, Κέφαλος, Θρασύβουλος, ἕτεροι μυρίοι" ἀλλ᾽ 
ὅμως οὐδεὶς πώποτε τούτων διὰ παντὸς ἔδωκεν ἑαυτὸν εἰς 
Ε΄ οὐδὲν τῇ πόλει, ἀλλ᾽ ὁ μὲν γράφων οὐκ ἂν ἐπρέσβευσεν, 5 
3 \ 4 3 “ἡ » ε , b. 3 ἴων 
ὁ δὲ πρεσβεύων οὐκ ἂν ἔγραψεν. ὑπέλειπε γὰρ αὐτῶν 
ἕκαστος ἑαυτῷ ἅμα μὲν ῥᾳστώνην, ἅμα δ᾽ εἴ τι γένοιτ᾽ 
ἀναφοράν. 


, > ¥ x Ν “ ε ἴω 
τι OVV; ELTOL τις AV, συ τοσουτον ὑὕπερήὴρας 220 
ῥώμῃ καὶ τόλμῃ ὥστε πάντα ποιεῖν αὐτός; οὐ ταῦτα λέγω, 
ΟΦ oS 3 ΄ ΄, > \ τ ,ὕ ,ἅ ὃ 
ἀλλ᾽ οὕτως ἐπεπείσμην μέγαν εἶναι τὸν κατειληφότα κίνδυνον 
aN , ese -i5. oS , , Whe , ὍΣΩΝ 
᾿ τὴν πόλιν WOT οὐκ ἐδόκει μοι ὙΠ ΠΕ i POLOLGL ὈυΟΈΜΎΤΙ 
302 τῆς ἰδίας ἀσφαλείας διδόναι, ἀλλ᾽ ἀγαπητὸν εἶναι εἰ μηδὲν 5 
παραλείπων τις ἃ δεῖ πράξειεν. ἐπεπείσμην δ᾽ ὑπὲρ ἐμαυτοῦ, 221 


πώποτε τούτων D, L, Ατ; τούτ. πώπ. vulg. δέδωκεν Ο. 6. ὑπέλειπε 


| 4 A> 


§ 220. 2. 
ταῦτα λέγω Σ, L; λέγω ταῦτα vulg. 


λιπὼν Ατ,Υ. 


§ 221. 1,2. ἐπεπείσμην.. 


Σ, 1.; ὑπελείπετο L? (mg.), vulg. Le 
τοὺς ἄλλους after Town L?, vulg 


ὥραν (for χώραν) Ar. 2; ὁρᾶν (for ὥραν Ὁ) > (yp). 


γένοιτ᾽ Σ, L, Ar; γίγνοιτο vulg. 

ρα μη) CA Otte, ΓΕ 
kid. τὸν κατειλ. Ο. 4. τῇ πόλει Β. 
ovdeviay Φ (yp). 6. παρα- 


ὅμως δ᾽ om. ΟἹ, uz. 


S| first inspired Demosthenes (as a boy) to 
_ devote himself to oratory: see note on 
7 4 99’. 
| «3, ᾿Αριστοφῶν: see note on § 704.— 
τ΄ Κέφαλος: see § 251. τ πο ὐβούλος, οἵ 
_ Collytus, who served under his distin- 
_ guished namesake in the Restoration of 
q 403 B.C. (XXIV. 134). He was afterwards 
a warm friend of Thebes: see Aesch. 
Ἷ Til. 138, ἀνὴρ ἐν Θήβαις πιστευθεὶς ὡς 
Ν ovdels ἕτερος. Cf. also Lys. xxvi. 21— 
| 24; Xen. Hell. v. 1, 26. (West.) 
mo, 4. Sud Παντοῦ, throughout; like ἁπλῶς, 
«$8 887, 179°. 
5. οὐκ ἂν ἐπρέσβευσεν .... ἔγραψεν : 
Poth iterative (M.T. 162): we often use 
would ἢ in such iterative expressions, with 
no potential force; as he would often tell 
er stories (see M. Τ. 240). 
7 ῥᾳστώνην, 7270 γ7,167η1{ of ease.—e 
τι γένοιτ᾽ ἀναφοράν, i.e. some retreat 
tn case of accident: εἴ τι γένοιτο depends 
on an apodosis implied in ἀναφοράν, 
_ something to which he could retreat; 
set. Aeschyl. Sept. 1015, ws ὄντ᾽ dva- 
 στατῆρα...εἰ μὴ θεῶν τις ἐμποδὼν ἔστη 
δορί (M.T. 480). The direct form, ἐάν τι 
γένηται, might have been see 2 sec 
Aesch. 11. 104, αὑτοῖς κατέλιπον τὴν εἰς 


" 


τὸ ἀφανὲς ἀναφορὰν ἂν μὴ πείθωμεν. The 
meaning comes from the middle ἀναφέ- 
ρεσθαι, to carry oneself back. But see 
Harpocr. ἀναφοράν, with reference to 
this passage: τὸ ἀναφέρειν τὴν αἰτίαν τῶν 
ἁμαρτηθέντων ἐπ᾽ ἄλλους. 

§ 220. 1. ὑπερῆρας ; did you excel? 
absolutely, or possibly sc. τούτους. 

2. ῥώμῃ: i.e. so as to need no dva- 
φορά (ὃ 219°). 

3. οὕτως ἐπεπείσμην, L had so thorough- 
ly convinced myself. Tf οὕτως is taken 
with μέγαν (Bl.), ὥστ᾽ οὐκ ἐδόκει (4) seems 
out of place. 

4. ἐδόκει is first personal (sc. ὁ κίν- 
duvos); then (without οὐκ) understood as 
impersonal with ἀγαπητὸν εἶναι. 

5. ayarnrov...mpdteev: in the direct 
form, ἀγαπητόν ἐστιν ἐάν Tis... δεῖ πράξῃ, 
we must be content (impers.) zf we (shall) 
do our duty, omitting nothing. ἐάν τις 
πράξῃ might have been retained (see note 
on § 219’). 

6. ἃ δεῖ-- τὰ δέοντα, our duty: ἃ is 
here felt as a definite relative; but 
with a slight change in the view it might 
have been ἃ ἂν δέῃ or ἃ δέοι (Dobree’s 
conjecture), with conditional force. A 
present indicative is seldom changed to 


158 AHMOSOENOY= 


τυχὸν μὲν ἀναισθητῶν, ὅμως δ᾽ ἐπεπείσμην, μήτε γράφοντ᾽ 
ἂν ἐμοῦ γράψαι βέλτιον μηδένα μήτε πράττοντα πρᾶξαι, 
μήτε πρεσβεύοντα πρεσβεῦσαι προθυμότερον μηδὲ δικαιό- 


\ ᾿ Υ΄, 9 3 a > X ¥ J ‘ 
5TEepov. διὰ ταῦτ᾽ ἐν πᾶσιν ἐμαυτὸν ἔταττον. λέγε Tas 
3 ᾿ Ν ‘a / 
ἐπιστολὰς Tas τοῦ Φιλίππου. 
ΕΠΙΣΤΟΛΑΙ. 
a td 
222 Ἐἰς ταῦτα κατέστησε Φίλιππον ἡ ἐμὴ πολιτεία, Αἰσχίνη; 


4 Ἂ Ἂς 5 EN 5 “A \ Ν ἊΝ Ν 
ταύτην τὴν φωνὴν ἐκεῖνος ἀφῆκε, πολλοὺς καὶ θρασεῖς τὰ 
νῷ , “~ / 3 / 4 > 3 e ’, 
πρὸ τούτων τῇ πόλει ἐπαιρόμενος λόγους. ἀνθ᾽ ὧν δικαίως 
ἐστεφανούμην ὑπὸ τουτωνὶ, καὶ σὺ παρὼν οὐκ ἀντέλεγες, 
5 ὁ δὲ γραψάμενος Διώνδας τὸ μέρος τῶν ψήφων οὐκ ἔλαβεν. 
» Ν ἴω Ν id % 4 Ν 3 4 
Kai μοι λαβὲ ταῦτα τὰ ψηφίσματα τὰ τότε μὲν ἀποπεφευγότα, 

ὑπὸ τούτου δ᾽ οὐδὲ γραφέντα. 


—— eee “Φ-Φ 


i δα, 


a τὐὖὔὖἷἂὝΝΜ, σα τὰς--. 


2. ἀναισθητων (-ον over -ων) L; ἀναισθητῶν τι, some other Mss. (see VOm.), Thom. 


Mag., most edd.; ἀναίσθητον (adv.) =, vulg., Bl. 3. ἄνευ ἐμοῦ ᾧ, B (ἂν in mg.) ; 
ἐμοῦ pn Y, O. πράττοντά τι O, F. 4. πρεσβεύοντα om. O. μηδὲ (before 
bux.) 2, L5 μήτε vulg. 5. πᾶσιν 2, L, V6; ἅπασιν» vulg. λέγε δὴ Φ. 
6. ras τοῦ Σ᾽ L, &, Ai. 2.3 om. B, vulg.; vas O. 

8 222. 2. ἀφῆκε dv ἐμὲ vulg.; διε ἐμὲ om. Σ, Li. 3. τῇ πόλ. ἐπαιρ. Noy. 
Σ, L, vulg.; τῇ πόλ. λόγ. ἐπαιρ. Ar; Ady. TH πόλ. ἐπαιρ. A2. 5. Διώδας Ar. 
τὸ μέρος >, L; τὸ πέμπτον μέρος vulg. (See ὃ 1033.) "6. AaBe D; AdBe ΤᾺ: 
λέγε L?, vulg. τὰ τότε μὲν & (by corr.), L, vulg., om. 2}. Ws δὴ Ade 


the optative in such definite relative 
clauses, as ἃ δέοι would naturally suggest 
ἃ ἂν δέῃ here as the direct form; but 
when no ambiguity can arise, the optative 
is sometimes found, as in Xen. Hell. v. 
4, 8, εἶπεν ὅτι ἄνδρα ἄγοι ὃν εἷρξαι δέοι, 
where the antecedent of ὃν is definite. 

8 221. 1,2. ἐπεπείσμην (repeated): 
see note on ἃ 199? (end). 

2. τυχὸν, perhaps, accus. 4050]. (M.T. 
851). --ὠΟὠἀναισθητῶν : I follow Vomel, 
Bekk., and West. in this reading, though 
ἀναισθητόν (adv.) has better Ms. authority. 
—6pws, nevertheless, with reference to 
ἀναισθητῶν .---μήτε... γράψαι: the direct 
form would be οὔτ᾽ ἂν ἐμοῦ γράψειε 
βέλτιον οὐδεὶς : for μή thus used with the 
infin. in or. 0b/., see M.T. 685. See Plat. 
Ap. 37 A, and Liddell and Scott, art. μή, 
B. 5, c. ἄν belongs to γράψαι, πρᾶξαι, 
and πρεσβεῦσαι, and βέλτιον to both 
γράψαι and πρᾶξαι. 


§ 222. 3. ἐπαιρόμενος : Harpocr. : 
ἀντὶ τοῦ ἐπανατεινόμενος, Δημοσθένης 
ἐν τῷ ὑπὲρ Κτησιφῶντος. Cf. XIX. 153, 
οὐδὲν ἂν ὑμῖν εἶχεν ἀνατείνασθαι φοβερόν 
(of threats of Philip); and Eur, Iph. T. 
1484, παύσω δὲ λόγχην ἣν ἐπαίρομαι 
ξένοις (of a spear uplifted to strike). (Β].) 
ἐπαιρόμενος is imperfect, as is shown by 
τὰ πρὸ τούτων. 

4. παρὼν, though present: see §§ 83° 
and 1178. 

5. Διώνδας: mentioned with contempt 
in § 249’. He is said (Vit. x. Orat.; 
Dem. 72) to have indicted also the decree 
of Aristonicus (§§ 83, 223).—TO μέρος: 
see notes on §§ 1037, 266%. 

6. ψηφίσματα : for the plural see note 
on ὃ 2235.---ἀποπεφευγότα, acguitted (on 
the γραφὴ παρανόμων): τὸ φεῦγον ψήφισμα, 
XXIII. 58, is the decree on trial. 

7. γραφέντα, indicted: cf. γραφέντα, 
proposed, ὃ 86%. See note on ὃ 564. 


AE Ta 


7 ΠΈΡΙ TOY ΣΤΕΦΑΝΟῪ 159 


VHOISMATA. 
Ταυτὶ τὰ ψηφίσματ᾽, ἄνδρες ᾿Αθηναῖοι, τὰς αὐτὰς συλ- 
Ν \ > Ν Eas >» ν / \ 3 fs 
| λαβὰς καὶ ταὐτὰ ῥήματ᾽ ἔχει ἅπερ πρότερον μὲν ᾿Αριστόνικος 
[Γ΄ A δὲ ων ΄, ε ΄, Ν poe: > , 
| νῦν ὃὲ Κτησιφῶν γέγραφεν οὑτοσί. Kat ταῦτ᾽ Αἰσχίνης 
3 ἴω : 
οὔτ᾽ ἐδίωξεν αὐτὸς οὔτε τῷ γραψαμένῳ. συγκατηγόρησεν. 
καίτοι τότε τὸν Δημομέλη τὸν ταῦτα γράφοντα καὶ τὸν 
14 ε / κά 3 A ἴω a) lal x 
᾿ς Ὑπερείδην, εἴπερ ἀληθῆ pov viv κατηγορεῖ, μᾶλλον ἂν 
} " 33 ’ὔ “Δ / »-“ SRN, 2 Ν 7.4 ν lal \ 3, 3 Φ 
εἰκότως ἢ τόνδ ἐδίωκεν. διὰ τί; ὅτι τῷδε μὲν ἔστ᾽ ἀνενεγ- 
 κεῖν ἐπ᾽ ἐκείνους καὶ τὰς τῶν δικαστηρίων γνώσεις καὶ τὸ 
53 τοῦτον αὐτὸν ἐκείνων μὴ κατηγορηκέναι ταὐτὰ γραψάντων 
ν ea lal ἴω A 
ἅπερ οὗτος νῦν, καὶ τὸ τοὺς νόμους μηκέτ᾽ ἐᾶν περὶ τῶν 
4 eure πραχθέντων Burr opew, καὶ πόλλ᾽ ἕτερα: τότε δ᾽ 
αὐτὸ τὸ πρᾶγμ᾽ ἂν ἐκρίνετ᾽ ἐφ᾽ αὑτοῦ, πρίν τι τούτων 


concerning the decree of Aristonicus and 
δευτέρου κηρύγματος in ὃ 834, see notes on 
_ that passage and on ὃ 1207. 

«4. συγκατηγόρησεν, arded 2. in the accu- 
_ sation (as συνήγορος). 

5. Δημομέλη.. .-Ὑπερείδην: the two 
τ΄ names probably indicate a decree moved 
_ by Demomeles (cousin of Demosthenes) 
and amended or enlarged by Hyperides. 
_ Such double or treble bills were common 
(see C. I. Att. 11. Nos. 469 and 12); 
whence τὰ ψηφίσματα in ὃ 222°. 

6. εἵπερ.. νῦν κατηγορεῖ: the simple 
present condition is correct here, and 
more effective than G. H. Schaefer’s 
Κατηγύρει. The following μᾶλλον ἂν 
ἐδίωκεν implies its own unreal condition, 
εἰ ἐδίωκεν, within itself. The meaning is, 
of he is now accusing me honestly, he 
would have had more reason for prosecut- 
ing D. and H. then than he has for 
prosecuting Ctes. now. The distinction 
of κατηγορῶ and διώκω here and in ]. 4 is 
_the same as in ὃ οἷ : cf. notes on §§ 149, 154. 
 § 224. 1. τῷδε, like τόνδε in ὃ 2237, 


§ 223. 1. ὦ ἄνδρ. vulg.; ὦ om. &, L. 5. Anuouértyn 2, F, Y, &, O, B*; 

— Anuouérnv L, vulg. 6. ὝὙπερίδην L. νῦν om. L. 
᾿ $224. τ. ὅτι τῷδε Σ, L; ὅτι τῷ vulg.; τούτῳ μὲν γάρ ἐστιν (Without διὰ 7i;) At. 
ἐνεγκεῖν (ἀν- in mg.) ΑἹ. 2. wm’ (for ér’) O. 3. ταὐτὰ 2, L; ταῦτα vulg. 
4. viv 2, L, Ar; νυνὶ vulg. 6. ἂν ἐκρίνετο Σ, L, V6; dvexpivero At, vulg. 
ὃ 223. i1—3. For the questions is Ctesiphon, who is called οὗτος in 4; 


while Aeschines is τοῦτον αὐτὸν in 3. 

4. μηκέτ᾽ édv...Kkarnyopeiv: the prin- 
ciple that ‘‘no man can be twice put in 
jeopardy for the same offence” is distinctly 
stated in the Attic law: see XX. 147, ol 
νόμοι δ᾽ οὐκ ἐῶσι δὶς πρὸς τὸν αὐτὸν περὶ 
τῶν αὐτών οὔτε δίκας οὔτ᾽ εὐθύνας οὔτε 
διαδικασίαν οὔτ᾽ ἄλλο τοιοῦτον οὐδὲν εἶναι, 
and also XXIv. 55. This could here be 
urged by Ctesiphon as a moral, not as a 
legal, argument. Aeschines is prosecuting 
him now on the ground of charges against 
Demosthenes which were declared false 
by the acquittal of Hyperides eight years 
before,—charges for which he did not 
similarly prosecute H. then and for which 
he could not legally prosecute Dem. now. 
This is all an answer to διὰ τί; (which 
refers to § 223 (end)).—Tev οὕτω πραχθέν- 
των, i.e. matters so settled (as these charges 
against Dem.): see XXXVI. 60, δικάζεσθαι 
τῶν οὕτω πραχθέντων. 

6. ἐφ᾽ αὑτοῦ, on 715 own merits, 1.6, 


before any judgment of the court had been 


passed upon the case. 


223 


224 


ied 


160 ΔΗΛΛΟΣΘΕΝΟΥΣ | 


I ἡ 
a a 9 > is > , a Vee n 2 
225 προλαβεῖν. ἀλλ᾽ οὐκ ἣν, οἶμαι, τότε Ὁ νυνὶ ποιεῖν, EK 
an , \ , an 5 ͵ὕ Po ae 
παλαιῶν χρόνων καὶ ψηφισμάτων πολλῶν ἐκλέξαντα a μήτε 
Ψ ἣς ΣΤᾺ rd 4 e ἴων , 
προύΐήδει μηδεὶς μήτ᾽ ἂν φήθη τήμερον ῥηθῆναι, διαβάλλειν, 
καὶ μετενεγκόντα τοὺς χρόνους καὶ προφάσεις ἀντὶ τῶν 
ς ἀληθῶν ψευδεῖς μεταθέντα [τοῖς πεπραγμένοις δοκεῖν τι 
΄ 3 ὍΣ / aA > Dy aK. “ 3 ΄, > Ἂν 
226 λέγειν. οὐκ ἦν τότε ταῦτα, ἀλλ᾽ ἐπὶ τῆς ἀληθείας, ἐγγὺς 
τῶν ἔργων, ἔτι μεμνημένων ὑμῶν καὶ μόνον οὐκ ἐν ταῖς 
χερσὶν ἕκαστ᾽ ἐχόντων, πάντες ἐγίγνοντ᾽ ἂν ot λόγοι. 
διόπερ τοὺς παρ᾽ αὐτὰ τὰ πράγματ᾽ ἐλέγχους φυγὼν νῦν 
ς ἥκει, ῥητόρων ἀγῶνα νομίζων, ὡς γ᾽ ἐμοὶ δοκεῖ, καὶ οὐχὶ τῶν 
πεπολιτευμένων ἐξέτασιν ποιήσειν ὑμᾶς, καὶ λόγου κρίσιν «ἢ, 
οὐχὶ τοῦ τῇ πόλει συμφέροντος ἔσεσθαι. 


— 


αὐτοῦ Σ, L; ἑαυτοῦ vulg. 


corr.; προσλαβεῖν L}, Ατ; προλαβεῖν 1.2, vulg. 


πρίν τι τούτου προδλαβεῖν Σ', τούτων and προλαβεῖν by 


(See Vomel.) 


§ 225. .1. 62, L,Ar; 4 vulg. ποιεῖν Σ ; ποιεῖ L, vulg. 2. πολλῶν 
Ὅτη Δ. 5. δυκεὶ τὸ (v over ΤΙ) =. 

8 226. 1. ἐπὶ τῆς Σ, Ar, Φ (yp); ἐπ᾽ αὐτῆς vulg. ἐγγὺς Σ, Ar; ἐγγὺς 
οὔσης L, vulg. 2. μονονουχὶ L?. πάντες om. V6. 4.) pip SB, BeAr 
viv ὕστερον vulg. 5. ὧς γ᾽ ἐμοὶ Σ, L; ws γέ μοι vulg.; ws ἐμοὶ At. 6. ὑπο- 


λαμβάνων after ὑμᾶς vulg.; om. Σ,, L}, Ar. 


§ 225. 1. ὃ νυνὶ ποιεῖν : all Mss. 
except Σ have ποιεῖ for ποιεῖν. Either 
can well be understood; but here the 
appositives διαβάλλειν and δοκεῖν favour 
ποιεῖν. 

2. παλαιῶν χρόνων: i.e. the time of 
the peace of Philocrates, in regard to 
‘which Aeschines introduced many decrees 
which had no real bearing on the argu- 
ment (see III. 58—78). 

3. μήτ᾽ av...pnOyvar, or chought would 
be mentioned to-day (ῥηθῆναι dv=pnbein 
dv): see M.T. 2201. The negatives μήτε 
etc. show that the antecedent of ἃ is 
indefinite.—8raBdadAev, 20 misrepresent 
(cast reproach upon) the case. 

4. προφάσεις, grounds for action, 
whether true or false. See note on ὃ 178°, 

Demosthenes still clings to his plea 
that the story of the peace is ancient 
history. See Essay I. § 4. 

§ 226. 1. ἐπὶ τῆς ἀληθείας : cf. 


§ 17”. 


7. οὐχὶ Σ L; ov vulg. 


\ 


2. ἐν ταῖς χερσὶν : for the figure West. 
compares mant-festus. 

3. πάντες οἱ λόγοι, 1.6. the whole 
discussion. 

4. τοὺς... φυγὼν : cf. § 15”. 

5. ῥητόρων ἀγῶνα: cf. Thuc. 111. 6738, 
ποιήσατε δὲ Tots “Ἄλλησι παράδειγμα οὐ 
λόγων τοὺς ἀγῶνας προθήσοντες ἀλλ᾽ ἔργων. 
Weil quotes XIX. 217: οὐδὲ γὰρ ῥητόρων 
οὐδὲ λόγων κρίσιν ὑμᾶς τήμερον...προσήκει 
ποιεῖν, ἀλλ᾽ ὑπὲρ πραγμάτων αἰσχρῶς καὶ 
δεινῶς ἀπολωλότων τὴν ὑπάρχουσαν αἰσχύ- 
νην εἰς τοὺς αἰτίους ἀπώσασθαι. 

6. λόγου.. συμφέροντος : λόγου κρίσιν 
is a trial of eloquence. Cf. the verbal 
forms λόγον κρίνειν and τὸ τῇ πόλει 
συμφέρον κρίνειν. 

With § 226 the orator ends his grand 
comparison (begun in § 139) between the 
part played by Aeschines in rousing the ~ 
Amphissian war and his own part in ἢ 
uniting Athens and Thebes against 
Philip. 


TEP] TOY STEPANOY 161 


“Εἶτα σοφίζεται, καὶ φησὶ προσήκειν ἧς μὲν οἴκοθῷ BET 

ἥκετ᾽ ἔχοντες δόξης περὶ ἡμῶν ἀμελῆσαι, ὥσπερ δ᾽, ὅταν πῶς Ἢ 
᾿ς οἷόμενοι περιεῖναι χρήματά τῳ λογίζησθε, εἂν καθαιρῶσιν 
᾿ς αἵ ψῆφοι καὶ μηδὲν περιῇ, συγχωρεῖτε, οὕτω καὶ νῦν τοῖς ἐκ 


Οθεσθε At; προθέσθαι O}. 


τοῦ λόγου φαινομένοις προσθέσθαι. 


θεάσασθε τοίνυν ὡς 


θ Ν ἐπ ϑ, > Ν , lal Ψ x Ἂν ὃ ,ὔ Sy 
σα βον, ως εοικεν, EOTL φύσει TAV O TL αν' μη LKALWS γ) 


πεπραγμένον. 


§ 227. : 3. 


λογίζεσθε Y, V6, Σ' (η in mg.). 
καθαιρῶσιν Σ' (ac over &); καθαραὶ ὦσιν L, vulg. ἘΣ 
6. ὅτι μὴ δικαίως ἂν ἢ VO. 


ἐκ γὰρ αὐτοῦ τοῦ σοφοῦ τούτου παρα- 


ἂν Σ, Ar; κἂν 1, (or κἀν), vulg. 
προφαιν. Νό. πρόσ- 


88 227. 296. Αἱ 8 226 the proper 
defence ends, with the account of the 
alliance with Thebes. The remainder of 
the speech, before the epilogue, is de- 
voted to replies to three arguments of 
Aeschines, one comparing the trial of the 
case to an investigation of an account 
(§ 227—251), a second charging Demo- 
sthenes with being ill-starred (§§ 252— 
275), and a third charging him with being 
a crafty rhetorician (85 276—296). 

In §§ 227—251 the orator refers to the 
exhortation of Aeschines to the judges 
(59—61) to cast aside any prejudices in 
favour of Demosthenes which they may 
have, and to proceed as they would if 
they were examining a long account, 
prepared to accept any result which the 
reckoning may bring out. Aeschines 
refers here only to the facts concerning the 
peace of Philocrates; but Demosthenes 
chooses to apply the remarks to his whole 
political life. While Aeschines referred 
only to the debit side of the account, 
Demosthenes speaks of both sides, and 
especially of what stands on the credit 
side of his own account with the state, 
including credit for preventing calamities 
by his judicious policy. He ends (§ 251) 
by turning against Aeschines the case of 
Cephalus, which had been brought up 
against himself. 


ὃ 227. 1. εἶτα σοφίζεται, then he 


' puts on airs of wisdom, or becomes very 


subtle, with the same sarcasm as in σοφοῦ 
παραδείγματος, ὃ 2281. 


G. D. 


~ 


2. ἀμελῆσαι : Aeschines (III. 60) says, 
μήτ᾽ ἀπογνώτω μηδὲν μήτε καταγνώτω πρὶν 
ἀκούσῃ. 

3. περιεῖναι χρήματά tw, that one has 
a balance in his favour.—doyltynobe: cf. 
Aesch. Ill. 59, καθεζώμεθα ἐπὶ τοὺς λο- 
γισμούς.---ἂν καθαιρῶσιν...περιῇ, 27. the 
counters are decisive and there is no 
balance remaining. With most recent 
editors, I follow =! and read καθαιρῶσιν, 
the common text having καθαραὶ wow, 
which was referred to the counters being 
cleared off from the abacus (ἄβαξ or 
ἀβάκιον) : cf. § 2317. This was a reckon- 
ing-board, on which counters (originally 
ψῆφοι, pebbles) represented units, tens, etc. 
according to their position. See the 
article Adacus in Smith’s Dict. of Ant. 


Aeschines says (59), ἐπινεύσας ἀληθὲς εἷναι. 


. 


ὅ τι ἂν αὐτὸς ὁ λογισμὸς αἱρῇ, whatever 
the account proves (cf. αἱρεῖν τινα κλέ- 
πτοντα), and there is a strong presumption 
that Demosthenes uses a similar expres- 
sion in his reply. Blass adopts καθαιρῶ- 
ow in the sense of aipwow (erwetsen) but 
knows no other example. Kdochly quotes 
Dion. Hal. Ant. Rom. vil. 36, 6 Τί & ἂν 
ai πλείους ψῆφοι καθαιρῶσι, τοῦτο ποιεῖν 
(and again, slightly changed, in 39): here 
the meaning determine is beyond ques- 
tion. 

5. προσθέσθαι, acquiesce in: cf. προσ- 
θεμένην, ὃ 203°. 

6. ἢ πεπραγμένον: see § 17813, and 
note on § 1η89. 


11 


5 


228 


162 AHMOZOENOY> 


δείγματος ὡμολόγηκε νῦν γ᾽ ἡμᾶς ὑπάρχειν ἐγνωσμένους 
ἐμὲ μὲν λέγειν ὑπὲρ τῆς πατρίδος, αὐτὸν δ᾽ ὑπὲρ Φιλίππου" 
οὐ γὰρ ἂν μεταπείθειν ὑμᾶς ἐζήτει μὴ τοιαύτης οὔσης τῆς 3% 
ε 4 e ¥ Χ ¢ / \ Ν ν > 53 
229 ὑπαρχούσης ὑπολήψεως περὶ ἑκατέρου. καὶ μὴν OTL Ὑ οὐ 


= 


\"\ Ὁ} 


we Cae ie 


δίκαια λέγει μεταθέσθαι ταύτην τὴν δόξαν ἀξιῶν, ἐγὼ 


’, “ 
διδάξω ῥᾳδίως, οὐ τιθεὶς ψήφους (οὐ γάρ ἐστιν ὁ τῶν 
/ a ν 
πραγμάτων οὗτος λογισμὸς), ἀλλ᾽ ἀναμιμνήσκων ἕκαστ᾽ 
ς ἐν βραχέσι, λογισταῖς ἅμα καὶ μάρτυσι τοῖς ἀκούουσιν 
ὑμῖν χρώμενος. ἡ γὰρ ἐμὴ πολιτεία, ἧς οὗτος κατηγορεῖ, 
Cet τὰς A , \ ΄ a > \ 
ἀντὶ μὲν τοῦ Θηβαίους μετὰ Φιλίππου συνεμβαλεῖν εἰς τὴν 

ὰ ν la “A 
χώραν, ὃ πάντες ῳοντο, μεθ᾽ ἡμῶν παραταξαμένους ἐκεῖνον 
’ὔ 5 V6 3 Ἂν \ “ 5 ἊΝ ΣΝ “~ Ν / 

230 κωλύειν ἐποίησεν: ἀντὶ δὲ τοῦ ἐν TH ᾿Αττικῃ TOV πόλεμον 
εἶναι ἑπτακόσια στάδια ἀπὸ τῆς πόλεως ἐπὶ τοῖς Βοιωτῶν 
Ἐν / 3 Ν \ aA \ Ν ds / Ἄ 
ὁρίοις γενέσθαι: ἀντὶ δὲ τοῦ τοὺς λῃστὰς ἡμᾶς φέρειν καὶ 


8 228. 2. viv γ᾽ Σ, L; νῦν O; νυνὶ vulg.; om. ΑἹ: ἡμᾶς Σ, L; ηὑμᾶς 


V6; ὑμᾶς vulg. 4. οὔσης THs om. Oxyrh. pap. 

8 229. 1. γ᾽ οὐκὶ Oxyrh. pap. 2. τὴν om. Σ΄, over ταύτην 2”. ὑμᾶς 
(after ἀξιῶν) vulg.; om. Σ, L}, Ar. 5. τοῖς ἀκούουσιν om. AI. 7. συνεισ- 
βαλεῖν At. 2. 8. ἔσεσθαι (after ᾧοντο) vulg.; om. 2, L’, Ar. ὑμῶν A2. 
συμπαραταξαμένους Ar. 

§ 230. 1. τὸν om. L}, Ὁ: 3. δὲ above line 2. ἡμῷν (as above) O. 


§ 228. 2. ἡμᾶς (so Σ)...ἐγνωσμέ- mere arithmetic or book-keeping.—ov 
vous, that it ἐς assumed that we (Aesch. γὰρ.. λογισμὸς, for that ts not the way to 
and myself) have been thus judged (have reckon affairs of state. 

this reputation): in the direct form ὑπάρ- 4. ἀναμιμνήσκων ἕκαστ᾽ : he renders 
χομεν ἐγνωσμένοι. See note on ὃ 954. It his account, not by setting his services 
appears that ἔγνωσμαι is always passive against his sins, but by setting the posi- 
(see Veitch): cf. Eur. H. F. 1287, to- tive gain from his public policy against 
βλεπώμεθ᾽ ὡς ἐγνωσμένοι, and Thuc. 111. the calamities which would have resulted 
3812, ὡς οὐκ ἔγνωσται. For the active see from the opposite policy. ; 

Dem. IV. 29, οὐκ ὀρθῶς ἔγνωκεν. Baiter 5. λογισταῖς: in the double sense of 
(see Dissen) translates thus: confitetur computers and comptrollers of accounts: 
nunc nos esse cognitos (h. 6. de nobis see note on ὃ 1177.— Tots ἀκούουσιν: 
constare) me quidem verba facere pro addressed equally to the court and the 
patria, ipsum vero pro Philippo. The _ spectators. 


personal construction is like that of Ar. 7. μετὰ and σῃυν- emphasize one 
Νὰ. 918, γνωσθήσει τοί ποτ᾽ ᾿Αθηναίοις another. 
οἷα διδάσκεις τοὺς ἀνοήτους, you shall be g. κωλύειν: present, of the whole 
shown (for it shall be shown). business of checking Philip; the aor. 
4. μὴ τοιαύτης οὔσης -- εἰ μὴ τοιαύτη συνεμβαλεῖν (7) of an incursion, 
ἣν. The unique reading of the Oxyrh. 8 280. 2. ἑπτακόσια στάδια, about 
papyrus, μὴ τοιαύτης ὑπαρχούσης, is sug- 80 miles: see note on § 195°. Ἷ 
gestive. 3. γενέσθαι: sc. ἐποίησε. By ὁρίοις 
8 229. 3. οὐ τιθεὶς ψήφους (con- he means the further confines of Boeotia. 4 
tinuing the figure of § 227), ie. not by —Aygotds: see note on § 145°, and for — 


‘ 
i 
A ν᾿ 
y - ΜΒ 


ΠΕΡΙ 


" ταῦτα. 


4- ἄγειν (ἄ by corr. ?) Σ. 
6. τὸν Pir. ἔχειν At. τοὺς om. Al. 
ΒΤ 151. 4. 6 ἐμὸς Vo. 7. 
§ 232. 1. Tair >, 1, Φ; 


pirates in general [VII.] 3, 4, 14, I5. 
_ The rescue of Oreus and Eretria from 
_ Philip (88 79, 87) prevented Euboea from 
being a nest for plunderers.—dépew καὶ 
Ε ἄγειν : the common term for general 
ἑ plundering. 
᾿ς 4: ἐκ θαλάττης, 07 the side of the sea, 
_ with reference to ἐκ τῆς Εὐβοίας. 
5. τὸν “Ἑλλήσποντον : for the Helles- 
pont and Byzantium in 340 B.C. see 
_ §§ 80, 87, 88, 93, 94, and Hist. 88 66—68. 

ὃ 231. 1. Ψήφοις ὅμοιος : cf. κόμαι 
Α Χαρίτεσσιν ὁμοῖαι, 1]. xvil. 51. 

2. ἀντανελεῖν ταῦτα, fo strike this off 
(the services of § 230) in balancing the 
| account, as ψῆφοι would be removed from 
| the ἀβάκιον. 
| 4. οὐκέτι προστίθημι, 7) do not go on 
(ἔτι) to add, 1.6. to the credit side of the 
account. 

5. ἐν οἷς. κατέστη: as in the cases of 
et lius, Thessaly, and Phocis. 

6. φιλανθρωπίας : especially Philip’s 
“easy terms with Athens after Chaeronea, 
which were the indirect result of the firm 


TOY ZTEPANOY 


ε “ A wn 
ὑμεῖς καλῶς ποιοῦντες τοὺς καρποὺς κεκόμισθε. 


163 


_- ν 3 A 3 ΄ > ae ‘ 3 \ i “tae ΄ὕ 
᾿ς ἄγειν ἐκ τῆς Εὐβοίας ἐν εἰρήνῃ τὴν ᾿Αττικὴν ἐκ θαλάττης 
i > ΄ Ν ΄ To <% \ A X ε ree 
εἶναι πάντα τὸν πόλεμον: ἀντὶ δὲ τοῦ τὸν Ἑλλήσποντον 5 
ἔχειν Φίλιππον, λαβόντα Βυζάντιον, συμπολεμεῖν τοὺς Βυ- 
ζαντίους μεθ᾽ ἡμῶν πρὸς ἐκεῖνον. 
ε A »» Ν , EN al 3 ~ “ 
ὁ τῶν ἔργων λογισμὸς φαίνεται; ἢ δεῖν ἀντανελεῖν ταῦτα, 
ἀλλ᾽ οὐχ ὅπως τὸν ἅπαντα χρόνον μνημονευθήσεται σκέ- 
ψασθαι; καὶ οὐκέτι προστίθημι ὅτι τῆς μὲν ὠμότητος, ἣν 
4 > τὰ , a ΄ ΄, ΄ » 3 aA 
— ἐν ots καθάπαξ τινῶν κύριος κατέστη Φίλιππος ἔστιν ἰδεῖν, 
' δι...’ lal / A \ ΄ aA Ά, 
ἑτέροις πειραθῆναι συνέβη, τῆς δὲ φιλανθρωπίας, ἣν τὰ 
λοιπὰ τῶν πραγμάτων ἐκεῖνος περιβαλλόμενος ἐπλάττετο, 


ἀλλ᾽ 


Ν \ > ἈΝ SSE 3 > ~ 5 A ν ε ἣν ef 
Kau μὴν οὐδὲ ταῦτ᾽ εἰπεῖν ὀκνήσω, OTL ὁ τὸν ρήτορα 
/ ’, > ’ὔ Ν \ ~ 5 x» 
βουλόμενος δικαίως ἐξετάζειν καὶ μὴ συκοφαντεῖν οὐκ ἂν 


ἀπὸ τῆς Εὐβ. Az. 5. πάντα above the line Y. 


7. ἐκεῖνον ἐποίησεν Al. 


ἐπλάττετο Σ, 1.1; πρὸς ὑμᾶς ἐπλάττετο vulg. 
τοῦτ᾽ vulg. 


and dignified attitude of Demosthenes 
and his friends. See Hist. § 8r. 

7. περιβαλλόμενος : the common figure 
of zuvesting oneself with anything (like a 
garment), hence acgutring. 

8. Kadds ποιοῦντες, by the blessing of 
Heaven: cf. 1. 28, ὧν καλῶς ποιοῦντες 
ἔχουσι, and καλῷς ποιοῦσι, XXI. 212. 
This phrase sometimes means fortunately 
(as here), approaching in sense the more 
common εὖ πράσσειν, to be prosperous: 
sometimes doing as one should, as in 
XXI. 2, καλῶς καὶ τὰ δίκαια ποιῶν ὁ δῆμος 
οὕτως ὠργίσθη, and LVII. 6, καλῶς ποι- 
οὔῦντες τοὺς ἠδικημένους σεσώκατε. To 
show the distinction between καλῶς ποιῶν 
and εὖ πράσσων, Dissen quotes XX. 110, 
ὅτε δ᾽ ὑμεῖς καλῶς ποιοῦντες ... ἄμεινον 
ἐκείνων πράττετε. The active expressions 
εὖ ποιεῖν and κακῶς ποιεῖν are entirely 
distinct from καλῶς ποιεῖν. 

§§ 232—241. We have here an 
account of the power of Athens under 
the leadership of Demosthenes, compared 
with her earlier resources. 


11..-2 


dpa σοι ψήφοις ὅμοιος 2317 


164 


οἷα σὺ νῦν ἔλεγες τοιαῦτα κατηγόρει, παραδείγματα πλάττων 305. 

καὶ papa καὶ χηματα μιμούμενος (πάνυ γὰρ παρὰ τοῦτο 

5 ---οὐχ ὑρᾷ τ Αγ ἔγομε τὰ τῶν Beata εἰ τουτὶ TO ῥῆμα 

ἀλλὰ μὴ τουτὶ διελέχθην ἐγὼ, ἢ δευρὶ τὴν χέρα ἀλλὰ μὴ 

233 δευρὶ παρήνεγκα), ἀλλ᾽ ἐπ᾿ αὐτῶν τῶν ἔργων ἂν ἐσκόπει 

τίνας εἶχεν ἀφορμὰς ἢ πόλις καὶ τίνας δυνάμεις, ὅτ᾽ εἰς τὰ 

πράγματ᾽ εἰσήειν, καὶ τίνας SUE ao αὐτῇ μετὰ ταῦτ᾽ 

ἐπιστὰς ἐγὼ, καὶ πῶς εἶχε τὰ τῶν ἐναντίων. 

5 ἐλάττους ἐποίησα τὰς δυνάμεις, Tap πεν: τἀδίκημ᾽ ἂν 

ἐδείκνυεν ὃν, εἰ δὲ πολλῷ μείζους, οὐκ ἂν ἐσυκοφάντει. 

ἐπειδὴ δὲ σὺ τοῦτο πέφευγας, ἐγὼ ποιήσω καὶ σκοπεῖτε 
εἰ δικαίως χρήσομαι τῷ λόγῳ. 

Δύναμιν μὲν τοίνυν εἶχεν ἡ πόλις τοὺς νησιώτας, οὐχ 


234 
5. οὐχορᾶς Σ (ώ over pa). 
6, 7. δευρὶ (ι changed to εἰ) ...δευρὶ 2. 
8 233. 1. av σκόπει A2. 5: 
elone F, Y. συνῆγον A2. ἘΣ 


6. ἐδείκνυες Y, Οἱ, F (corr.). 
7. τοῦτο σὺ A2. 


8 234. 1. ἡ πόλις εἶχεν Υ. 


ΔΗΛΛΟΣΘΕΝΟῪΥΣ 


πράγματα after ᾿ Ελλήνων vulg.; om. Σ, L}, At. 
τὴν xetpa...devpt om. F (text), add. mg. 
εἰσήειν DX, vul 
τἀδικήματα V6. 
ὄντα (for dv) V6. 


εἶτ᾽ εἰ fee 


g.; elonja B! (ut videtur, Lips.) ; 
ἂν om. V6; ov (for av) A2. 
ἐσυκοφάντεις O, Y, ®, F (corr.). 


§ 282. 3. τοιαῦτα : cognate (sc. 
κατηγορήματα).---παραϑδείγματα, like the 
illustration just discussed : cf. παραδείγ- 
ματος in ἃ 2281. 

4. ῥήματα...μιμούμενος : besides the 
expressions (ῥήματα) repeated by Aeschines 
(probably with no little exaggeration) in 
11. 166, of which he asks (167), ταῦτα 
δὲ τί ἐστιν, ὦ κίναδος ; ῥήματα ἢ θαύματα; 
we have in 209, ποῖ φύγω, ἄνδρες ᾿Αθη- 
ναῖοι; περιγράψατέ με οὐκ ἔστιν ὅποι 
ἀναπτήσομαι, quoted from Demosthenes. 
See other quotations in 71 and 72, 
especially ἀπορρῆξαι τῆς εἰρήνης τὴν σὺυμ- 
μαχίαν. Imitations of gestures (σχήματα) 
are, of course, harder to detect ; but there 
is a plain one in 167, κύκλῳ περιδινῶν 
σεαυτὸν ἔλεγες.---παρὰ τοῦτο γέγονε, de- 
pend on this. Dissen quotes Cic. Orat. 
8, 27: itaque se purgans iocatur Demo- 
sthenes : negat in eo positas esse fortunas 
Graeciae, hoc an illo verbo usus sit, et huc 
an illuc manum porrexerit. 

5. οὐχ ὁρᾷς; cf. ὃ 2665, 

6. μὴ τουτὶ : in the second member 


of an alternative indirect question, μή can 
be used as well as οὐ. ͵ 
§ 233. 1. 
ἀληθείας, ὃ re . 
2. Gcoppds, means (for war): ἀφορμή 
is properly @ starting-point, or something 
to set out from (ἀφ᾽ ὧν τις ὁρμᾶται), as in — 
Thuc. I. go, τήν τε Πελοπόννησον πᾶσιν 
ἔφασαν ἱκανὴν εἶναι ἀναχώρησίν τε καὶ 
adopunv.—duvapes: here in the same 
general sense as δύναμιν in § 234! (see 
note).—6r’...eloyjerv: before the renewal 
of the war in 340 B.c. Cf. § 60%. 
8. εἰ.. λόγῳ: cf. § 2528, and xxIII. 
24, ws ἁπλῶς καὶ δικαίως χρήσομαι τῷ 
λόγῳ. . 
8 234. τ. δύναμιν here refers to 
sources of mzlitary power, like allies, even 
when no actual troops are included: see 
ὁπλίτην δ᾽, ἱππέα οὐδένα (5). Both δυνά- 
μεις and δύναμις, however, may denote 
troops: cf. § 2375, τῶν πολιτικῶν δυνά 
μεων, and 2474; so Xen. An. I. 3, 12, 
ἔχει δύναμιν καὶ πεζὴν καὶ ἱππικὴν καὶ 
ναυτικήν. Cf. δυνάμεις § 2333. 


ἔργων ; cf. ἐπὶ τῆς ει 


--- 


L, O, F, &, Vém., West., Lips. 


TEP! TOY 2TEPANOY 


165 


9 9 \ \ 9 ,ὕ ¥ \ , ΕΣ 
ατπαντας, ἀλλὰ τους ἀσθενεστάτους" OUTE Yep Χιος OUTE 


Ῥόδος οὔτε Κέρκυρα μεθ᾽ ἡμῶν jv: χρημάτων δὲ σύνταξιν 


λεγμένα: ὁπλίτην δ᾽, ἱππέα πλὴν τῶν οἰκείων οὐδένα. 


> , Ν , , \ PN ΜΝ 
«Εἰς TWEVTE Και τετταράκοντα, τάλαντα, και Ταῦτ ἼΨ προεξει- 


ὃ δὲ 


[4 Ν , \ vf > ε \ A 3 A 
πάντων καὶ φοβερώτατον Kat μάλισθ᾽ ὑπὲρ τῶν ἐχθρῶν, 


οὗτοι παρεσκευάκεσαν τοὺς περιχώρους πάντας ἔχθρας ἢ 
φιλίας ἐγγυτέρω, Μεγαρέας, Θηβαίους, Εὐβοέας. 


\ \ 
THO μεν 


ἴω , σ ε ἴω » Ν > \ x » Ν 
TYS πόλεως OUTWS UT PXEV €XOVTA, και οὐδεὶς αν εχου παρα 


4. ὑμῶν Ο. 4- 


προεξηλεγμένα Ο. Ε: 
Cf. § 94°. 


δ᾽ ἢ ἱππέα vulg.; ἢ om. &, 
6. καὶ (after πάντων) om. AT. 2. 


7. παρεσκευάκεσαν Ατ; -άκεισαν Σ, L, vulg., Bk., Dind.; παρεσκεύασαν A2, V6. 


ἅπαντας At. 8. 
ἐυβοας ΟἹ. 
§ 235. 1. καὶ τὰ μὲν Αἱ. 2. 


2. οὔτε... ἣν : this refers to the early 
part of 340 B.C., when Chios and Rhodes 


were independent of Athens as the result 


of the Social War (357—355 B.c.), but 
Byzantium, which then followed Chios 
and Rhodes, had already renewed her 
friendship (§ 230°): see Hist. §§ 2, 63. 
Corcyra, the old friend and ally of 
Athens, had become hostile to her be- 
fore 353 B.C. (see XXIV. 202; Diod. xv. 
95): 

3. χρημάτων σύνταξιν: Harpocr. 
says, ἔλεγον δὲ καὶ τοὺς φόρους συντάξεις, 
ἐπειδὴ χαλεπῶς ἔφερον οἱ “Ἑλληνες τὸ τῶν 
φόρων ὄνομα, Καλλιστράτου ὀὕτω καλέ- 
σαντος, ὥς φησι Θεόπομπος. (See Thuc. 
I 96; Arist. Pol. Ath. 237°; Aesch. 111. 
258.) The payment of the original assess- 
ment made on the Delian confederacy by 
Aristides in 478—477 B.C. was first called 
φόρος from φέρω, as Thucydides explains 
it, οὕτω γὰρ ὠνομάσθη τῶν χρημάτων ἡ 
φορά. The First Athenian Empire made 
the name odious, so that, when the new 
federation was formed in 378, the term 
σύνταξις, agreement, was adopted for the 
annual payment. 

4. πέντε kal τετταράκοντα τάλαντα: 
this sorry amount of 45 talents shows the 
decline of the power of Athens after the 
Social War. The tribute of 460 talents 
of the time of Aristides was raised to 600 
under Pericles (Thuc. 11. 137), and (if we 


Μεγαρεῖς all Mss., Bk. (see ὃ 237%). 


Εὐβοέας 2, L, vulg. ; 


may trust Aesch. II. 175 and Plut. Arist. 
24) to 1200 or 1300 after the Peace of 
Nicias, in large part by the allies com- 
muting personal service for payments of 
money (Thuc. I. 99). The 45 talents 
mentioned here must be the minimum. 
We have uncertain accounts of the later 
increase. In [Dem.] X. 37, 38, the in- 
come of Athens is stated at 130 talents, 
which was afterwards increased to 400: 
Boeckh thinks that this may have referred 
to the annual tribute. Demosthenes is 
said (Vit. x. Orat. 851 B, decree) to have 
persuaded the allies to give a σύνταξιν 
χρημάτων of more than §00 talents. (See 
Boeckh, Staatsh. d. Ath. I. Bk 3, §§ 17, 
19.) For the Second Athenian Con- 
federacy see Grote X. ch. 77.—mpoefe- 
Aeypéva, collected in advance, probably 
by generals to pay their mercenaries. 
Aeschines (II. 71) speaks of τοὺς περὶ τὸ 
βῆμα καὶ τὴν ἐκκλησίαν μισθοφόρους, οἱ 
τοὺς μὲν ταλαιπώρους νησιώτας καθ᾽ ἕκα- 
στον ἐνιαυτὸν ἑξήκοντα τάλαντα εἰσέπρατ- 
τον σύνταξιν. See Isoc. IV. 132. 

5. ὁπλίτην δ᾽, ἱππέα : for the asyrde- 
ton cf. ὃ 94°: most Mss. have ἢ ἱππέα. 

7. οὗτοι: Aeschines and his party.— 
παρεσκευάκεσαν ... ἐγγυτέρω: cf. τοὺς 
θεοὺς ἵλεως αὑτῷ παρασκευάζειν, Plat. 
Leg. 803 E. 

8 235. 2. οὕτως ὑπῆρχεν ἔχοντα, 
i.e. this 7s what we had to depend on. 


166 AHMOZOENOY2 


ταῦτ᾽ εἰπεῖν ἄλλ᾽ οὐδέν: τὰ δὲ τοῦ Φιλίππου, πρὸς ὃν ἦν 
ἡμῖν ὁ ἀγὼν, σκέψασθε πῶς. πρῶτον μὲν ἦρχε τῶν ἀκολου- 
5 θούντων αὐτὸς αὐτοκράτωρ, ὃ τῶν εἰς τὸν πόλεμον μέγιστόν 
Ox ἐστιν ἁπάντων" εἶθ᾽ οὗτοι τὰ ὅπλ᾽ εἶχον ἐν ταῖς χερσὶν ἀεί: 
ο΄ ἔπειτα χρημάτων εὐπόρει, καὶ ἔπραττεν ἃ δόξειεν αὐτῷ, οὐ 
προλέγων ἐν τοῖς ψηφίσμασιν, οὐδ᾽ ἐν τῷ φανερῷ βουλευό- 
μενος, οὐδ᾽ ὑπὸ τῶν συκοφαντούντων κρινόμενος, οὐδὲ γραφὰς 

10 φεύγων παρανόμων, οὐδ᾽ ὑπεύθυνος ὧν οὐδενὶ, ἀλλ᾽ ἁπλῶς 
236 ἐγὼ δ᾽ ὁ πρὸς 


RY 0 TORS 


αὐτὸς δεσπότης, ἡγεμὼν, κύριος πάντων. 
τοῦτον ἀντιτεταγμένος (καὶ γὰρ τοῦτ᾽ ἐξετάσαι δίκαιον) 
τίνος κύριος ἦν; οὐδενός: αὐτὸ γὰρ τὸ δημηγορεῖν πρῶτον, 
οὗ μόνου μετεῖχον ἐγὼ, ἐξ ἴσου προὐτίθεθ᾽ ὑμεῖς τοῖς παρ᾽ 
ς ἐκείνου μισθαρνοῦσι καὶ ἐμοὶ, καὶ ὅσ᾽ οὗτοι περιγένοιντ᾽ 
ἐμοῦ (πολλὰ δ᾽ ἐγίγνετο ταῦτα, dv ἣν ἕκαστον τύχοι πρό- 
φασιν), ταῦθ᾽ ὑπὲρ τῶν ἐχθρῶν ἀπῇτε βεβουλευμένοι. ἀλλ᾽ 
ὅμως ἐκ τοιούτων ἐλαττωμάτων ἐγὼ συμμάχους μὲν ὑμῖν 
ἐποίησα Εὐβοέας, Axatovs, Κορινθίους, Θηβαίους, Μεγαρέας, 


237 


3. qv om. A2. 4. σκέψεσθε O. ὑπῆρχε V6. ἀκολούθων V6. 
5. αὐτοκράτωρ ὧν vulg.; ὧν om. 2, L, F, ®, B, Y. ὃ τῶν..-πόλεμον Σ, L, F, ®; 
τῶν... πόλεμον, δ Y. 6. ἐν ταῖς χερσὶν εἶχον Ar; εἶχον ἐν ταῖν χεροῖν A2. 
9. οὐδ᾽ ὑπὸ.. «κρινόμενος = (yp), vulg., Vom., West., Lips., Bl.; om. Σ΄. [1. ἁπάν- 
των Al. 

8 236. 4. μόνου Σ, L, Ar, B; μόνον vulg. 
2, ©; προὐτίθετε vulg. 6. ταῦτα Σ, &; τοιαῦτα L, vulg. 
ov) Az. 7. ἀπῇτε D3 ἀπῇειτε (or ἡ) L, O, vulg. 

§ 237. 2. μὲν ἡμῖν συμμάχους O. 3. Μεγαρέας Mss. 


προὐτίθεθ᾽ L, V6; προὐτίθεσθ᾽ 
ἕκαστον (a over 


Ὁ > 


7. οὐ προλέγων... βουλευόμενος : two 
important advantages of a despotism in 
war. Athens is not the last free state 
which has suffered from the opposite 
evils.” * See *Isocs ΠΡ 18) ‘19. 

9. οὐδ᾽... κρινόμενος was wanting in 
the original text of 2, and possibly is a 
reading which Demosthenes himself re- 
placed by the following οὐδὲ... παρανόμων. 
With the whole passage compare § 249 
and I. 4. 

8 236. 3. πρώτον, fo begin with: 
cf. XX. 54, ὁ λόγος πρώτον αἰσχρός. 

4. μετ-εἶχον : μετ- implies the sharing 
. of the right which the preceding clause 
states. —tmpovr(6e0’: cf. Iv. 1, εἰ mpouri- 
θετο λέγειν. 


5. ὅσ᾽... -περιγένοιντ᾽ ἐμοῦ, i.e. as often 
as they got the better of me. ‘The omitted 
antecedent of ὅσ᾽ is seen in ταῦθ᾽ (7). 

6. τύχοι (M.T. 532): sc. γενόμενον. 

7. ταῦθ᾽... βεβουλευμένοι, i.e. 77st 50 
often had you taken counsel in the enemy's 
interest when you left the Assembly: ταῦθ᾽ 
(cognate with βεβουλευμένοι) are the Bov- 
λεύματα in which περιγένοιντ᾽ ἐμοῦ, and 
these counsels you always took in the 
enemy’s interest. Cf. Andoc. III. 29, 
ἕν βούλευμα τοιοῦτον ἐβουλευσάμεθα; and 
Thuc. 11. 44), ἴσον τι ἢ δίκαιον (sc. βού- 
λευμα) βουλεύεσθαι. 

8 287. 2. ἐκ τοιούτων ἐλαττωμάτων, 
i.e. with such disadvantages at the out- 
οοἱ.---ασυμμάχους ... ἐποίησα: this refers 


ΠΕΡΙ TOY STE@ANOY 167 


᾿΄. , e 
᾿ς Λευκαδίους, Κερκυραίους, ἀφ᾽ ὧν μύριοι μὲν καὶ πεντακισχί- 
| Δ 3 “ la ἴω 
uot ἕένοι, δισχίλιοι δ᾽ ἱππεῖς ἄνευ τῶν πολιτικῶν δυνάμεων 5 
? 4 θ τ, / δ᾽ Ψ Ξὃ 10 TN , 
συνήχθησαν χρημάτων δ᾽ ὅσων ἐδυνήθην ἐγὼ πλείστην 
/ 3 , > \ , Ἃ Ν Ν ’, 
συντέλειαν ἐποίησα. εἰ δὲ λέγεις ἢ τὰ πρὸς Θηβαίους 5388 
’ 
δίκαια, Αἰσχίνη, ἢ τὰ πρὸς Βυζαντίους ἢ τὰ πρὸς Εὐβοέας; 
ἢ περὶ τῶν ἴσων νυνὶ διαλέγει, πρῶτον μὲν ἀγνοεῖς ὅτι καὶ 
πρότερον τῶν ὑπερ τῶν Ἑλλήνων ἐκείνων anya EVs 
τριήρων, τριακοσίων οὐσῶν τῶν πασῶν, τὰς διακοσίας ἡ 5 
SX / Ν > >)\. ΜᾺ θ ν΄ Oe , 
πόλις παρέσχετο, καὶ οὐκ ἐλαττοῦσθαι νομίζουσα οὐδὲ Kpi- 
᾿ς γοῦσα τοὺς ταῦτα συμβουλεύσαντας οὐδ᾽ ἀγανακτοῦσ᾽ ἐπὶ 
᾿ pd qn . ~ ex 
τούτοις ἑωρᾶτο (αἰσχρὸν yap), ἀλλὰ Tots θεοῖς ἔχουσα 
7 , la “- y 
χάριν, εἰ κοινοῦ κινδύνου τοῖς Ἕλλησι περιστάντος αὐτὴ -- 
1 δὰ sd 
διπλάσια τῶν ἄλλων εἰς THY ἁπάντων σωτηρίαν παρέσχετο. το 
> N A 
εἶτα κενὰς χαρίζει χάριτας τουτοισὶ συκοφαντῶν ἐμέ. τί 239 
Ἂν “ ΄, ει 5 ‘al , 3 > > LED SEK > ἘΝ 
γὰρ νῦν λέγεις οἱ ἐχρὴν πράττειν, ἀλλ᾽ οὐ TOT ὧν ἐν TY 
8 238. 1. ἢ πρὸς ΟἸ. 3. τῶν νήσων (for τῶν ἴσων) Β (yp), Reiske. 


all Μ55., Bk., Bl.; cf. xxxiv. 33, διαλέγει D3 διαλέγῃ vulg. Soo Tae 
Io. παράσχοιτο V6. 


διαλέγῃ 
om. Y. 


§ 239. 1. καινὰς ®; κενάς ye AI; ye om. 2, L, vulg. χαρίζῃ or -ἰζη all 
Mss., Bk., Bl. 2. οἵας (for of’) O. 
“ει ᾿ 
____ to the grand league against Philip, formed 3. Kal πρότερον, once also in former 
early in 340 B.C. by Demosthenes and days. 
; | Callias of Chalcis. See Hist. § 63 (end), 5. τριακοσίων... διακοσίας : the num- 


with notes. 
᾿ (above) : 
-sians, and Acarnanians see Aesch. 
05—97- 
4. μύριοι Kal πεντακισχίλιοι: this 
includes the Theban forces, which were 
added a year after the league was formed. 
7. συντέλειαν: this term was applied 
to the contributions of the new league, 
rather than σύνταξις (§ 234°): Aesch. (97) 
calls them σύνταγμα. 
§ 238. The orator here exposes with 
great effect one of the most unlucky 


For the Euboeans see § 79 
for the Euboeans, Peloponne- 
Ill. 


bers of the ships at Salamis are variously 
given; but nearly all agree in making the 
Athenian fleet about two-thirds of the 
whole. Aeschylus, who was in the battle, 
is our best authority when (Pers. 339) he 
gives the total as 310, and Demosthenes 
nearly agrees with him. Herodotus (VIII. 
I, 44, 48, 61) gives the total as 378 (the 
items giving 366), the Athenians having 
200, of which they lent 20 to the Chal- 
cidians. The Athenian orator in Thu- 
cydides (1. 74°) gives the total as 400 
and the Athenian ships as nearly two- 


blunders of Aeschines (143), that of 
charging him with imposing éwo-thzrds 


τς of the expense of the war on Athens, and 


only one-third on Thebes. Aeschines 
had forgotten the fleet at Salamis, of 
which Athens furnished two-thirds |}. 


thirds. The text of XIV. 29, which 
makes the total 200 and the Athenian 
ships 100, must be corrupt. 

8. αἰσχρὸν: sc. ἂν ἦν.---ἔχουσα goes 
with ἑωρᾶτο like the preceding νομίζουσα, 
κρίνουσα, and ἀγανακτοῦσ᾽. 


168 AHMOZOENOY= 


/ \ \ a > ἂν » > , μι Ν. 
πόλει καὶ παρὼν ταῦτ᾽ ἔγραφες, εἴπερ ἐνεδέχετο παρὰ τοὺς 
’ὕ Ν 3 ἣν > eM J > λό θ 5 >] ν 
παρόντας καιροὺς, ἐν οἷς οὐχ ὅσ᾽ ἠβουλόμεθα ἀλλ ὁσα 
΄ \ , ιν hy ΄ ε Ν 3 ’ eh’ 
5 δοίη τὰ πράγματ᾽ ἔδει δέχεσθαι: ὁ yap ἀντωνούμενος καὶ 
ταχὺ τοὺς παρ᾽ ἡμῶν ἀπελαυνομένους προσδεζξόμενος καὶ 
χρήματα προσθήσων ὑπῆρχεν ἕτοιμος. 
> 9" 9 A χὴν A , , ¥ , 
240 ANN εἰ νῦν ἐπὶ τοῖς πεπραγμένοις κατηγορίας ἔχω, TL 
x x” 3 ἌΝ > a) Ν Ἂ > ld 
ἂν οἴεσθε, εἰ τότ᾽ ἐμοῦ περὶ τούτων ἀκριβολογουμένου 
ἀπῆλθον αἱ πόλεις καὶ προσέθεντο Φιλίππῳ, καὶ ap’ EvBotas 
Ν “A x ’ ἂν if fa “ x x rf 
καὶ Θηβῶν καὶ Βυζαντίου κύριος κατέστη, TL ποιεῖν ἂν ἢ τί 
241 λέγειν τοὺς ἀσεβεῖς ἀνθρώπους τουτουσί; οὐχ ὡς ἐξεδόθη- 
3 ε 3 / » 3, 2 lal > > 
σαν; οὐχ ws ἀπηλάθησαν βουλόμενοι μεθ᾽ ὑμῶν εἶναι; εἶτα 
“ Ν ε ~ 3S \ / > \ / 
τοῦ μὲν Ἑλλησπόντου διὰ Βυζαντίων ἐγκρατὴς καθέστηκε, 
καὶ τῆς σιτοπομπίας τῆς τῶν Ἑλλήνων κύριος, πόλεμος δ᾽ 
A Ἂ \ > Ν > Ν Ν rd 4 
5 ὅμορος καὶ βαρὺς εἰς τὴν ᾿Αττικὴν διὰ Θηβαίων κεκόμισται, 


ἄπλους δ᾽ ἡ θάλαττα ὑπὸ τῶν ἐκ τῆς Εὐβοίας ὁρμωμένων 

4. παρόντα (σ above) =. ὅσα ἠβουλόμεθα Σ, ὅσα ἐβουλόμεθα Ατ. 2, Φ; ὅσα ἂν 
βουλώμεθα 1,, vulg. 6. ὑμῶν V6. προσδεχόμενος Ο. 

8 240. 2. εἰ τότ᾽ ἐμοῦ Σ, Ar. 2, Β (mg.); εἰ πότ᾽ ἐμοῦ L; εἴ ποτ᾽ ἐμοῦ vulg. 
περὶ τούτου Σ, L, ΕἸ; περὶ τούτων vulg., edd. 4. Βυζαντίων V6. . λέγειν 
οἴεσθε At; τουτουσὶ οἴεσθε B (yp), Y, O (mg.); οἴεσθε (here) om. Σ, L, ΟἹ, Φ, F. 

8 241. 2. οὐχ ὡς ἀπηλάθησαν vulg.; οὐχ ws om. Σ᾽ (added above the line), Bl. 
ὑμῶν Σ,1,; ἡμῶν vulg. Βυζάντιον A2, Reiske. κατέστη At, Y, ® (yp), 
B (yp); καθέστηκε Σ, L, vulg.; Φίλιππος add. L, ᾧ (yp), B (yp), om. Σ᾽ (added at end of 
line), vulg. 4. κύριος γέγονε L (above line), vulg.; γέγονε om. 2, At. 6. ἐκ 
om. =, L! (added by rst hand). ; 


8 239. 3. παρὼν, i.e. in the As- following supposition (2) that 7. did 


oa a Τὺ ὦ. ὅς . . ὕὕὕ. ας 


-- 


sembly, as Aesch. regularly was: see 
§ 2731.— eltrep ἐνεδέχετο: sc. ταῦτα γράφειν. 
-παρὰ...καιροὺς, 27 the crises through 
which we were then living. 

4. οὐχ ὅσ᾽... πράγματ᾽, vot all that 
we wanted (continuously), dz? all that 
circumstances (on each occasion) allowed 
us (M.T. 532). οὐχ ὅσα βουλοίμεθα would 
have meant zot all that we wanted in 
each case. 

5. ἀντωνούμενος (conative), didding 
against us (trying to buy). 

6. προσδεξόμενος... προσθήσων, ready 
to receive them and to pay them too (προσ-) 
for coming. 

§ 240. τ. νῦν: opposed to εἰ τότ᾽... 
ἀπῆλθον.---ἐπὶ τοῖς πεπραγμένοις, 1.6. 
for what I actually did, opposed to the 


nothing.—tl av οἴεσθε: ποιεῖν would 
naturally follow here, ἄν having its com- 
mon place before οἴεσθε (M.T. 2201): cf. 
§ 225%. But the long protasis εἰ τότ᾽... 
κατέστη causes τί and ἂν to be repeated 
with ποιεῖν (4); cf. IX. 35, τί οἴεσθε, 
ἐπειδὰν... γένηται, τί ποιήσειν; 

2. ἀκριβολογουμένου, guibdling, split- 
ting hairs, part of the unreal condition. 

4. τί ποιεῖν dv ἢ τί λέγειν represents 
τί ἐποίουν ἂν ἢ ἔλεγον; cf. § 2417. 

8 241. 1. οὐχ: sc. ἔλεγον dv. 

3—7. τοῦ μὲν... «λῃστῶν γέγονεν ; this 
seems to be a continuation of the indirect 
quotation, with οὐκ ἂν ἔλεγον ὡς under- 
stood. But there may be a change to ἃ 
direct quotation after εἶτα, without ὡς, as 
Vom. and West. take it. 


ΠΕΡΙ 


ε \ Ν 3. τι 
ὑγιὲς πεποιηκὸς οὐὸ 


7. ἔλεγεν A2; οὐκ... ἔλεγον O (mg.). 
§ 242. I. 
At, vulg. 4. 
Y (mg.), vulg.; om 2}, 

ὃ 243. 1. ὑπὲρ ®. oS 
δεικνύῃ A2; λέγει μ. δεικνύει VO; 


TOY ΣΤΕΦΑΝΟΥ 


ἐλεύθερον, 
ἀρουραῖος Οἰνόμαος, παράσημος ῥήτωρ. 
δεινότης εἰς ὄνησιν ἥκει τῇ πατρίδι; νῦν ἡμῖν λέγεις περὶ 543 ‘ 


ὦ (before ἄνδρες) vulg.; om. 2, 1.1. 2. 
ὑγιὲς ἐξ ἀρχ. wem. Ar; ἐξ ἀρχ. wer. by. Az. 6. 


εἰσιὼν om. ®. 
two opt. vulg. 4. 


169 


; Agorey γέγονεν; οὐκ ἂν ταῦτ᾽ ἔλεγον, καὶ πολλά γε πρὸς 
τούτοις ἕτερα; πονηρὸν, ἄνδρες ᾿Αθηναῖοι, πονηρὸν ὁ συκο- 242 
φάντης ἀεὶ καὶ πανταχόθεν βάσκανον καὶ φιλαίτιον: τοῦτο 

Ν + ’ὔ , > vd ng 3 3 \ > 3 lan) 
δὲ Kal φύσει κίναδος τἀνθρώπιόν ἐστιν, οὐδὲν ἐξ ἀρχῆς 


αὐτοτραγικὸς πίθηκος, 
/ Ν ε Χ 
Tk γὰρ “ἡ σὴς 


‘al ; , 9 “ » > Ν 9 a Ν 
Ἐ των Παρεληλυθότων͵; ΠΕΡ ἂν ει τις LATPOS ἀσθενοῦσι μεν 
308 τοῖς κάμνουσιν εἰσιὼν μὴ λέγοι μηδὲ δεικνύοι OL ὧν ἀποφεύ- 
᾿ς ἕονται τὴν νόσον, ἐπειδὴ δὲ τελευτήσειέ τις αὐτῶν καὶ τὰ 


first catom. ®. 3. κίναιδος 
τῇ = (mg.), 


λέγοι μηδὲ δεικνύη Σ; λέγῃ μ. 
ἐπειδὰν At. 


8 242. 2. πανταχόθεν, 27 every way 
(from every side).—drdalriov: cf. LVII. 
34 (end). 


3. Kal φύσει κίναδος,. α beast by his 
wery nature: κίναδος nascitur, συκοφάν- 
τὴς ἢι.---τἀνθρώπιον, homunculus, refers 
to mental not to dodily stature. 

4- ἐλεύθερον, i.e. worthy of a free-born 
Athenian: cf. μηδὲν ἐλεύθερον φρονῶν, 
Soph. Phil. τοού.---αὐτοτραγικὸς πίθηκος, 
a natural tragic ape: Schol. οἴκοθεν καὶ 
ἀφ᾽ ἑαυτοῦ ἔχει τὸ πιθηκίζεσθαι. avro- 
seems to have the same force as φύσει in 
3 (West.). Harpocr. under Tp ary KOs 
τιθηκὸς has: ἔοικε λέγειν τοῦτο ὁ ῥήτωρ 
ὡς καὶ περὶ τὴν ὑπόκρισιν ἀτυχοῦντος τοῦ 
Αἰσχίνου, καὶ μιμουμένου μᾶλλον τραγῳδοὺς 
ἢ τραγῳδεῖν δυναμένους Paroem. Gr. I. 
ΟΡ. 375: ἐπὶ τῶν παρ᾽ ἀξίαν σεμνυνομένων. 
These describe both the imitative and the 
boastful ape. Cf.§ 313°, τραγικὸς Θεοκρίνης. 
5. ἀρουραῖος Οἰνόμαος: see ὃ 180% 
and note. Aeschines is called vzstic, pro- 
bably because he ‘‘murdered Oenomaus” 
at the country Dionysia (τοῖς κατ᾽ ἀγρού5), 
which were sometimes celebrated by 
performances in the theatre of Collytus 
(Aesch. 1. 157), though this was a city 
deme. (See Blass.) See Hesych. under 
ἀρουραῖος Οἰνόμαος: Δημοσθένης Αἰ- 


-αρυ τ eae Maple δι53 Peo ee 


Ψ' 


ἀφο δν es on 


σχίνην οὕτω ἔφη, ἐπεὶ κατὰ τὴν χώραν 
περινοστῶν ὑπεκρίνετο Σοφοκλέους τὸν Οἰ- 
νόμαον. Westermann sees in αρουραῖος 
an allusion to Aeschines as σῦκα.. -συλλέ- 
γων (§ 2623), as the mother of Euripides 
was called dpovpaia θεός (Ar. Ran. 840) 
as a vender of vegetables. But the mean- 
ing of ὃ 262 is too doubtful to build upon. 
-παράσημος, counterfeit: Harpocr. has 
ἐκ μεταφορᾶς εἴρηται ἀπὸ τῶν νομισμάτων, 
K.T.A. See XXIV. 213, and Ar. Ach. 518. 

8 243. τ. viv ἡμῖν λέγεις: viv has 
great emphasis, and is repeated in 7: 
ἐς this the time you take to talk to us of 
the past ? 

2. ὥσπερ av (sc. ποιοίη) eb: 1.6. in 
talking to us of the past now you act as 
a physician (would act) tf he etc. If 
ποιοίη had been expressed with dv, ἰατρὸς 
would be its subject. 

3. Tots κάμνουσιν: the general term 
for patients, not merely while they are 
ill (ἀσθενοῦσι) but also after they are dead 
(ἐπειδὴ τελευτήσειέ τι5).---αἰσιτὼν, i.e. 272 λὲς 
visits.—8v ὧν ἀποφεύξονται : final. 

4. ἐπειδὴ... φέροιτο, but when one of 
them had died and his relatives were 
carrying offerings to his tomb (all part of 
the supposition), depending on εἰ... διεξίοι 
(M.T. 177, 558, 560): cf. Plat. Phaed. 


170 ΔΗΛΛΟΣΘΕΝΟῪΣ 


5 ζό > 3. aN ΄, 3 λ θ A “ΠῚ Ἂ aA ae ὃ ξί 
νομιζόμεν᾽ αὐτῷ φέροιτο, ἀκολουθών ἐπὶ τὸ μνῆμα διεξίοι, 
εἰ τὸ καὶ τὸ ἐποίησεν ἄνθρωπος οὑτοσὶ, οὐκ ἂν 

ἀπέθανεν. ἐμβρόντητε, εἶτα νῦν λέγεις ; 

3 3 / 2QVv Ἂς “Ὁ 3 , A 4 “Ὃ 
244 Ov τοίνυν οὐδὲ τὴν ἧτταν, εἰ ταύτῃ γαυριᾷς ἐφ ἡ 
΄ ey , ‘a ~ Le: = Hn 2 \ 
στένειν σε, ὦ κατάρατε, προσῆκεν, ἐν οὐδενὶ τῶν παρ ἐμοὶ 
Ῥ e 4 “ / ε a \ Le > ~ 
γεγονυῖαν εὑρήσετε TH πόλει. οὑτωσὶ δὲ λογίζεσθε. οὐδαμοῦ 
, > y \ 5 4 ε ιν te? A 5 \ ε Ν 
πώποθ᾽, ὅποι πρεσβευτὴς ἐπέμφθην ὑφ᾽ ὑμῶν ἐγὼ, ἡττηθεὶς 


5. φαίνοιτο Σ, ®. διεξήει Νό. 6. ἄνθρωπος MSS.; ἅνθ. Bk. οὗτος Y ; 
οὑτωσὶ Ol. av om. Y. 

8 244. 1—3. τοίνυν... οὑτωσὶ: Oxyrh. pap. (as in 2). I. ἧτταν αὐτὴν 
At, Reiske. 2. é€uod- Al. 2. 3. εὑρήσητε O. ovr. δὲ Noyif, om. V6. 


ΠΣ ὑπο B!, ἐξεπέμφθην Al. 2. 


παρ᾽ ὑμῶν A2. 


72 6, ἐπειδὴ δὲ ἀποθάνοι, μένοι. τὰ νομι- 
ζόμενα are the customary offerings to the 
dead (ἐναγίσματα), brought on the third 
and ninth days after death: τὰ κατὰ 
νόμους φερόμενα Tots νεκροῖς (Schol.). For 
views of such offerings see Smith’s Dict. 
Antiq. I. p. 888, and Gardner and Jevons’s 
Greek Antiq. p. 367. Aeschines (225) 
predicts that Demosthenes will use this 
illustration, and (189) that he will allude 
to Philammon the boxer (which he does 
in § 319); both predictions were of course 
inserted after the trial. Aeschines says, 
τελευτήσαντος δὲ ἐλθὼν εἰς τὰ ἔνατα 
διεξίοι, and Demosthenes probably refers 
to these ninth-day offerings. τὰ νομι- 
ζόμενα φέροιτο is often referred to the 
funeral itself; but it is difficult to explain 
φέροιτο in this sense, even if we suppose 
an allusion to the ἐκῴφορά. 

5. τὸ μνῆμα, Zhe tomb, built above 
ground, which may at the same time be 
a monunient: cf. μνήμασι, ὃ 208%. In 
the same double sense we must take 
τάφος in the famous passage, Thuc. II. 
43.8, ἀνδρῶν yap ἐπιφανῶν πᾶσα γῆ 
τάφος. 

6. τὸ καὶ τὸ, Ζλές and that, one of the 
few colloquial relics of the pronominal 
article: see IX. 68, ἔδει yap τὸ καὶ τὸ 
ποιῆσαι Kal τὸ μὴ ποιῆσαι.---ἄνθρωπος 
οὑτοσὶ: so all the mss., while recent 
editors adopt Bekker’s ἅνθρωπος. But 
the article may be omitted with demon- 
stratives when. the pronoun emphatically 


points out a present person or thing; as 
Plat. Gorg. 489 B, οὑτοσὶ ἀνὴρ οὐ παύσεται 
φλυαρῶν, and 505C, οὗτος ἀνὴρ οὐχ ὑπο- 
μένει ὠφελούμενος: see Thuc. I. 51°, νῆες 
ἐκεῖναι ἐπιπλέουσι, yonder are ships satl- 
ing up. See Gerth’s Kiihner, Il. 1, 
Ρ- 629d. 

7. ἐμβρόντητε, chunderstruck, stupefied 
by βροντή: cf. ἐμβεβροντῆσθαι, XIX. 235. 
For the relation of these words to τετύ- 
φωμαι see note on § 114.—elra, viv λέγεις ; 
see note on 1. Many editors take ἐμβρόν- 
τητε.. «λέγεις; as addressed to the physician 
by one of the relatives. It seems to me 
that it is addressed directly to Aeschines, 
as a question which would apply also to 
the physician with whom he is compared: 
cf. viv ἡμῖν λέγεις ; (1). 

8 244. 1. τὴν ἧτταν: still having 
in mind the figure of the reckoning 
(§ 227), he now argues that the chief 
item which his enemies place on the 
debit side, the defeat of Chaeronea, can- 
not justly be charged to him (cf. λογέ- 
ἕεσθε in 3). 

2. τῶν παρ᾽ esol, of what J was 
responsible for. 

4. ὅποι ἐπέμφθην : for the difference 
in construction between this and ὅποι 
πεμφθείην in § 45 (referring to the same — 
thing), and for ἐν οἷς κρατηθεῖεν (8), see 
note on ὃ 45. Little is known of any 
of these embassies of Demosthenes except 
those to Byzantium (§§ 87—89) and 
Thebes (§ 211 ff.). In 1X. 72 there is δ. 


ΠΕΡῚ TOY =TEbANOY 171 


ἀπῆλθον τῶν παρὰ Φιλίππου πρέσβεων, οὐκ ἐκ Θετταλίας 5 


οὐδ᾽ ἐξ ᾿Αμβρακίας, οὐκ ἐξ ᾿Ιλλυριῶν οὐδὲ παρὰ τῶν Θρᾳκῶν 
βασιλέων, οὐκ ἐκ Βυζαντίου, οὐκ ἄλλοθεν οὐδαμόθεν, οὐ τὰ 
τελευταῖ ἐκ Θηβῶν, ἀλλ᾽ ἐν οἷς κρατηθεῖεν οἱ πρέσβεις 

OR Lee Aes an na eS , A> 
αὑτοῦ τῷ λόγῳ, ταῦτα τοῖς ὁπλοις ἐπιὼν κατεστρέφετο. TavT 245 
οὖν ἀπαιτεῖς Tap ἐμοῦ, καὶ οὐκ αἰσχύνει τὸν αὐτὸν εἴς TE 
᾿ ee ΄, \ A , ΄ 3 κα Ψ 59 
μαλακίαν σκώπτων καὶ τῆς Φιλίππου δυνάμεως ἀξιῶν ἕν 

ὄντα κρείττω γενέσθαι; καὶ ταῦτα τοῖς λόγοις ; τίνος γὰρ 

+ UZ > eee > Ν aA ἜΣ ῸΣ ΜᾺ 2QA 
ἄλλου κύριος ἣν ἐγώ; οὐ yap τῆς ye ἑκάστου ψυχῆς, οὐδὲ 5 
τῆς τύχης τῶν παραταξαμένων, οὐδὲ τῆς στρατηγίας, ἧς ἔμ᾽ 

> wn ΕἸ , Y ἈΝ > 5 ἃς Ν - 5 x\ ε 
ἀπαιτεῖς εὐθύνας" οὕτω σκαιὸς εἴ. ἀλλὰ μὴν ὧν γ᾽ ἂν ὁ 246 
ῥήτωρ ὑπεύθυνος εἴη, πᾶσαν ἴδ λαμβάνετε: οὐ παραι- ) ᾿ 
ἱ > 


᾿ lant - > ἴω ἴω ᾿ς , 3 Υ 
“ees τινα οὖν ἐστι TQaAVUTQA; EW Τα T PAY (LATO αρχοόομέενα 


lot aiag 


ney 


: + πολῤκῳ ας 


ϑι 


καὶ προαισθέσθαι καὶ προειπεῖν τοῖς ἄλλοις" \ ταῦτα πέπρα- ia 


ταν pot. καὶ ἔτι τὰς ἑκασταχοῦ βραδυτῆτας, ὄκνους, 5 - 
5,6. οὐκ ἐκ... οὐδ᾽ ἐξ.. οὐκ ἐξ.. οὐδὲ mapa Σ, L, rst three vulg. (for Ist οὐδ᾽, οὐκ 
Ar; for last οὐδὲ, vulg. οὐ). 6. παρὰ om. 2! (added in mg.). 7. τὰ τελευταῖα 
ΣΤ; τὰ τελευταῖα πρώην L?, B (corr.), vulg.; 7a Ted. νῦν ΑἹ. 2. 
i= 8 245. 2. αἰσχύνει 2; αἰσχύνῃ (or -νἡ) L, vulg. dee ΡΣ παν 
᾿ς 4: γεγενῆσθαι Ar. γὰρ over δὴ VO. 5. οὐδὲ τύχης Νό. 
§ 246. 1. yom. Y. 2. λαμβάνετε Σ, L; λάμβανε vulg. 4- προ- 
αἰσθεσθαι Σ, Νό. 5. ὥκνουν V6. 


reference to his recent embassies into 
j | Peloponnesus, which kept Philip from 

_ conquering Ambracia (cf. IX. 27, 34); 
and in [XII.] 8—r1o (Philip’s letter) to 
one to the “kings of Thrace,” Teres and 
_ Cersobleptes, which was probably con- 
_ temporary with that to Byzantium. See 
_ Hist. §§ 59, 63. 

᾿ς 9. ὅπλοις κατεστρέφετο, i.e. he de- 
cided these cases by throwing his sword 
into the scale. Of course this has no 
__ reference to the embassies to Byzantium, 
_ Thebes, and Peloponnesus above men- 
_ tioned. 
= § 245. 1. ταῦτ᾽ ἀπαιτεῖς, you call 
_ me to account for these (§ 244°). 

2. εἰς μαλακίαν : West. cites Aesch. 

ΝΠ 148, 152, 155, and 175. In these 
- Demosthenes is ridiculed for having run 
| away at Chaeronea, when the whole 
allied army was put to flight. Aeschines 


is never charged with this; but he was 
probably not in the battle at all, being 
over fifty years old. Probably Demo- 
sthenes refers also to the nickname 
Βάτταλος: see note on § 180%, 

5. τῆς Ψυχῆς, the life. 

6. τῶν παραταξαμένων, the combatants : 
§§ 2084, 216°. 

7. εὐθύνας : used metaphorically.— 
σκαιὸς, awkward (mentally): cf. § 120%. 

§ 246. 2. λαμβάνετε: plural, as he 
turns suddenly from Aeschines to the 
whole assembly. 

3. ἰδεῖν... ἀρχόμενα κ-τ.λ.: no one can 
read the earlier orations of Demosthenes 
in the light of later events without feeling 
the justice of this claim to sagacity which 
he puts forward. He, indeed, of all 
the statesmen of Athens, saw things in 
their beginnings, and steadily warned 
the people of the coming danger. 


ΔΩ 


3 , , ἃ \ A ΄, ,ὕ 4 
ἀγνοίας, φιλονεικίας, a πολιτικὰ ταῖς πόλεσι πρόσεστιν 39 
ἁπάσαις καὶ ἀναγκαῖα ἁμαρτήματα, ταῦθ᾽ ὡς εἰς ἐλάχιστα 
συστεῖλαι, καὶ τοὐναντίον εἰς ὁμόνοιαν καὶ φιλίαν καὶ τοῦ 
τὰ δέοντα ποιεῖν ὁρμὴν προτρέψαι. 

/ \ > Ἂς 4 > ν > > x > Ν 5 
10 πεποίηται, καὶ οὐδεὶς μήποθ᾽ εὕρῃ κατ᾽ ἐμὲ οὐδὲν ἐλλει- 
247 φθέν. εἰ τοίνυν τις ἔροιθ᾽ ὁντινοῦν τίσι τὰ πλεῖστα Φίλιππος 
ὧν κατέπραξε διῳκήσατο, πάντες ἂν εἴποιεν τῷ στρατοπέδῳ 

Ν ᾽ν , \ / \ 5... Ἀν ἈΝ ,ὔ 
καὶ τῷ διδόναι καὶ διαφθείρειν τοὺς ἐπὶ τῶν πραγμάτων. 
3 “ aA \ , » ΄ 2) £ Ν 48: Ψ “ΠΩ͂Σ 
οὐκοῦν τῶν μὲν δυνάμεων οὔτε κύριος οὔθ᾽ ἡγεμὼν ἣν ἐγώ, 
λόγος τῶν κατὰ ταῦτα πραχθέντων πρὸς ἐμέ. 
Ν x “A “ / x Ν » ’ 
καὶ μὴν τῷ διαφθαρῆναι χρήμασιν ἢ μὴ κεκράτηκα Φι- 


ε 


ν 3 3 
5 WOTE Ovo O 


6. πηλίκα (for πολιτικὰ) Ar. 
ἐλάχιστα Σ, L; ἐλάχιστον vulg. 8. 
φιλίαν ἀγαγεῖν Al. 2. 
πάντα μοι Y- 10: 
L, vulg.; εὕροι F. 

§ 247. 1. 
5. els ἐμέ F, Φ. 6. 


West.; τοῦ ye διαφθ. xp. BI. 


6. πολιτικὰ ταῖς πόλεσι, z7zherent 771 
(free) governments: a striking case of a 
favourite Greek form of emphasis, which 
repeats the idea of a noun in an adjective. 
Here the whole idea could have been 
expressed either by πολιτικά or by οἰκεῖα 
ταῖς πόλεσι; but it is made doubly strong 
by πολιτικὰ ταῖς πόλεσι. The Greek 
constantly emphasizes by what we should 
call tautology, as in the repetition of 
negatives. In Aeschyl. Ag. 56, οἰωνό- 
θροον γόον ὀξυβόαν, we have a remarkable 
case of emphatic repetition, where the 
whole idea could have been expressed by 
οἰωνῶν γόον ὀξύν, shrill cry of birds, but 
the idea of cry is added in both adjectives. 
πόλεσι here has the same reference to free 
governments which is usually implied in 
πολιτεία (see note on § 65%): cf. Soph. 
Ant. 737, πόλις yap οὐκ ἔσθ᾽ ἥτις ἀνδρός 
ἐσθ᾽ ἑνός. With the whole passage cf. 
S§ 235, 236. 

7. ὡς belongs to els ἐλάχιστα, τγι{0 the 
smallest possible compass: see § 288%. 

8. συστεῖλαι, Zo contract: συστέλλω 


AHMOZOENOY2 


καὶ (for rats) O. vi 
συνστεῖλαι (v with .) 2; συστῆναι V6. 
τὴν over τοῦ Σ; 
μήποτε ἀνθρώπων vulg.; ἀνθρ. om. Σ, L*, At. 2. 
τὸ Kar’ ἐμὲ vulg.; τὸ om. Σ, LI. 
ἔροιτο ὁντινοῦν Σ, L, Ar; ὁντ. ép. vulg. 4: 
τῷ διαφθ. xp. ἢ μὴ Z, Lt, Y, Φ (yp), Al; τῷ μὴ διαφθ. xp. 
L (corr.), Β, ΟἹ; τῷ φθαρῆναι xp. ἢ μὴ A2; τῷ διαφθ. Xp. Φ; τὸ διαφθ. χρ. ἢ μὴ 
ἐκράτηκα A2. 


ω ’, 
καὶ ταῦτά μοι πάντα 


ὡς εἶ ΟἹ εἰς om. L, V6. 


τρέψαι Φ. 
εὕρῃ Σ, 
ἐλλειφθέν (one A above) =. 
δυναμένων Al. 


τὴν τοῦ L, Lips. 9. 


Φίλιππον Σ; Φιλίππου L, να]σ. 


sometimes means Zo shorten sail, as ἴθ | 
Ar. Ran. 999; cf. Eq. 432, συστείλας τοὺς 
ἀλλᾶντας. ᾿ 
το. πεποίηται: in the same sense ἃ5. 
πέπρακται (4): see note on § 4°,—ovBels_ 
μήποθ᾽.. οὐδὲν : it may be noticed that 
οὐδὲν (not μηδὲν) is the object of οὐ μὴ 
εὕρῃ; cf. 1V. 44, οὐδέποτ᾽ οὐδὲν ἡμῖν οὐ 
μὴ γένηται τῶν δεόντων. This seems to 
show that οὐ was felt as the leading 
negative in these expressions. —kKar’ ἐμὲ: 
most Mss. have τὸ κατ᾽ ἐμὲ, as in ὃ 247%. 
§ 247. 3. τῷ διδόναι, dy making 
Sifts. : 
4. δυνάμεων, referring to στρατο- 
πέδῳ (2): see note on § 234". καὶ μὴν. 
τῷ διαφθαρῆναι x.7.r. (6) corresponds to 
τῶν μὲν δυνάμεων, in place of a clause 
with δέ. 
5. ταῦτα (i.e. Suvdues): cf. κατὰ Tip 
στρατηγίαν (8 212°). | 
6. τῷ διαφθαρῆναι ἢ μὴ, 272 the matter 


sive than τῷ μὴ διαφθαρῆναι. Cf. XIX. 4» 
7, ὑπέρ γε τοῦ προῖκα ἢ μή. ' 


αι.“ 


a 
᾽ 


— 


TEP! TOY ZTEPANOY 


173 


Mimmov: ὥσπερ yap ὁ ὠνούμενος νενίκηκε TOV λαβόντα ἐὰν 


πρίηται, οὕτως ὁ μὴ λαβὼν καὶ διαφθαρεὶς νενίκηκε τὸν 


ὠνούμενον. 


“A μὲν τοίνυν ἐγὼ παρεσχόμην εἰς τὸ δικαίως τοιαῦτα 248 


9 ba Ral ε / ἂν > 3 / 
WOTE ANTTYTOS 7) πόλις TO KAT εμε. 


/ ΜᾺ Ἂς 3 “Ὁ Ν “A ¢ ’ ω Ν 
γράφειν TOUTOV TE Pt εμου, T Pos πολλοῖς ETEPOLS TAVTA και 


λέξω. 


4 vA > # aA δ᾽ ε fi ε lal mo Cae nO 
᾿ παραπλήσια τούτοις ἐστίν: a δ᾽ οἱ πάντες ὑμεῖς, ταῦτ᾽ ἤδη 
μετὰ γὰρ τὴν μάχην εὐθὺς ὁ δῆμος, εἰδὼς καὶ 


« ἣς 4 ee De Ἂν > a > > A lal ὃ A Ἀ 
εοράκως πάνθ οσ E77 PATTOV eyo, εν AUTOLS τοις OELVOLS και 5 


φοβεροῖς ἐμβεβηκὼς, ἡνίκ᾽ οὐδ᾽ ἀγνωμονῆσαί τι θαυμαστὸν 


ἘΣ Ν \ \ agi la \ Ν I a 
ἣν τοὺς πολλοὺς πρὸς ἐμέ, πρῶτον μὲν περὶ σωτηρίας τῆς 
σ ~ 

πόλεως TAS ἐμὰς γνώμας ἐχειροτόνει, καὶ πάνθ᾽ ὅσα τῆς 
nw ν > 9 Pd ε , ἴων , δ 
φυλακῆς ἐνεκ᾽ ἐπράττετο, ἢ διάταξις τῶν φυλάκων, αἱ 


8. καὶ διαφθαρεὶς Σ, 1.1; 


ηδὲ διαφθ. = (yp), 1.2, vulg. 


8 248. 2. τουτονὶ Αἱ, F. aio OM: by AT. ὑμεῖς D, L1; ὑμεῖς 
ἴστε vulg. 5. ἑωρακὼς MSS.; €op. Dind., later edd. (cf. § 64)°. 6. φοβεροῖς καὶ 
δεινοῖς Y. 8. βουλευόμενος (after πόλεως) Σ" (above line). 9. φυλάκώῶν Σ. 


7. ὃ ὠνούμενος : conative, he who 
would buy. 

8. ὁ μὴ λαβὼν Kal διαφθαρεὶς (-Ξ- ὃς 
μὴ ἔλαβε καὶ διεφθάρη), better than μηδὲ 
διαφθαρεὶς, as it more closely unites the 
corruption with taking the bribe, Ze who 


_ refused to take the bribe and be corrupted. 


§ 248. τ. εἰς τὸ... τοῦτον, 1.6. to 


᾿ _ justify Ctesiphon’s language in his decree: 


see ὃ 571. 
3. οἱ πάντες ὑμεῖς : sc. παρέσχεσθε. 
6. ἐμβεβηκὼς, standing amid, sur- 
rounded by: BéBnka, stand, is related to 


ἵσταμαι as γέγονα to εἰμί and κέκτημαι to 


ἔχω. ---ἡνίκ᾽ οὐδ᾽. πρὸς ἐμὲ, when most 
men might have shown some want of 
feeling towards me without surprising 
anyone: this rather awkward translation 


_ shows the force of the construction of 


θαυμαστὸν ἣν (without ἄν) and the infini- 
tive, where the chief potential force falls 
on the infinitive. (See M.T. 415, 416, 
and Appendix v. p. 406.) We naturally 
(but incorrectly) translate when it would 
have been no wonder, throwing the chief 
force on θαυμαστὸν ἦν, so that dv seems 
necessary: Blass reads οὐδ᾽ ἄν. The 
principle is the same as in the more 


_ common εἰκὸς ἦν σε τοῦτο ποιῆσαι, you 
} 


would properly have done this, which by 
a slight change of emphasis might be 
εἰκὸς ἂν ἣν σε τοῦτο ποιῆσαι, ἐΖ would 
have been proper for you to do this. The 
same is seen in Eur. Med. 490, εἰ yap 
ἦσθ᾽ ἄπαις, συγγνωστὸν ἦν σοι τοῦδ᾽ 
ἐρασθῆναι λέχους, i.e. 2721. that case you 
might pardonably have been enamoured: 
see M.T. 422! (last example), while with 
ἄν it would mean 7 would have been 
pardonable in you to be enamoured (with 
a slight change in the emphasis). 

8. τὰς ἐμὰς γνώμας, wy proposals of 
public measures: this and the following 
πάνθ᾽ ὅσα... ἐπράττετο do not include such 
general measures for the public safety as 
the famous decree of Hyperides for the 
enfranchisement of slaves, the recall of 
exiles, and similar extreme provisions 
(see Hist. § 80). An earlier decree passed 
after Chaeronea, which may have been 
proposed by Demosthenes, provided for 
the removal of women and children from 
the country into fortified places, and 
directed the generals to garrison all the 
forts on the frontier with Athenians or 
metics: see Lycurg. Leocr. 16. 

9. ἡ διάταξις τῶν φυλάκων : see Thuc. 
11. 24, φυλακὰς κατεστήσαντο κατὰ γῆν 


174 AHMOZOENOY2 


το τάφροι, τὰ εἰς τὰ τείχη χρήματα, διὰ τῶν ἐμῶν ψηφισμάτων 31 
on ἐγίγνετο: ἔπειθ᾽ αἱρούμενος σιτώνην ἐκ πάντων ἔμ᾽ ἐχείρο- 
᾿ φο2 )ιαϑτόνησεν ὁ δῆμος. 
ἐπιμελὲς κακῶς ἐμὲ ποιεῖν, καὶ γραφὰς, εὐθύνας, εἰσαγγελίας, 
πάντα ταῦτ᾽ ἐπαγόντων μοι, οὐ δι’ ἑαυτῶν τό γε πρῶτον, 
ἀλλὰ Sv. ὧν μάλισθ᾽ ὑπελάμβανον ἀγνοήσεσθαι (ἴστε γὰρ 
δήπου καὶ μέμνησθ᾽ ὅτι τοὺς πρώτους χρόνους κατὰ τὴν 
ἡμέραν ἑκάστην ἐκρινόμην ἐγὼ, καὶ οὔτ᾽ ἀπόνοια Σωσικλέους 


καὶ μετὰ ταῦτα συστάντων οἷς ἣν 


οὔτε συκοφαντία Φιλοκράτους οὔτε Διώνδου καὶ Μελάντου 
μανία οὔτ᾽ ἀλλ᾽ οὐδὲν ἀπείρατον ἣν τούτοις κατ᾽ ἐμοῦ), ἐν 


Il. ἐκ πάντων om. V6; 


ἐκ πάντων γ᾽ A2. 


§ 249. 1. ἦν om. Α2. 4. ἀγνοήσεσθαι Σ, L (θή over no); ἀγνοηθήσεσθαι 
vulg. 5. κατὰ τὴν ἡμέραν ἑκάστην X, At (σχεδὸν before κατὰ) ; κατὰ ἡμέραν 
ἑκάστην L; καθ᾽ ἐκ. ox. Nu. A2; καθ᾽ éx. hu. vulg. 6. ovd’ (for οὔτ) Y. 


7. οὐδὲ (for 1st οὔτε) Y. 
(for rovros) Φ. 


καὶ κατὰ θάλασσαν, ὥσπερ δὴ ἔμελλον διὰ 
παντὸς τοῦ πολέμου φυλάξειν. 

τὸ. τάφροι... τείχη: this sudden re- 
pairing of the fortifications in the panic 
after the battle has nothing to do with 
the more elaborate work on the walls 
undertaken in the following year, when 
Demosthenes was τειχοποιός (§ 113°). 
Lycurgus (44) thus describes the general 
enthusiasm: οὐκ ἔστιν ἥτις ἡλικία οὐ 
παρέσχετο ἑαυτὴν εἰς τὴν τῆς πόλεως 
σωτηρίαν, ὅτε ἡ μὲν χώρα τὰ δένδρα συνε- 
βάλλετο, οἱ δὲ τετελευτηκότες τὰς θήκας, 
οἱ δὲ νεῷ τὰ ὅπλα. The same excitement 
prevailed when the walls of Athens were 
hastily rebuilt after the battle of Plataea, 
while Themistocles kept the Spartans 
quiet by diplomacy: see Thuc. I. go—93. 
On both occasions tombstones were used 
in building the walls, and some of these 
may now Ὀ6 seen in a piece of the 
wall of Themistocles near the Dipylon 
gate. Demosthenes gave a talent to the 
state after the battle of Chaeronea (Vit. x. 
Orat. p. 851 A). 

II. σιτώνην, an extraordinary official 
appointed in special.times of distress to 
regulate the trade in grain and to guard 
against scarcity. The grain trade was 
ordinarily in the charge of 35 σιτοφύλακες 
(20 in the city, 15 in the Piraeus): see 


Μελάντου Σ, 1.1, Ar. 2; Μελάνου vulg. ὃ. 


τοῖς 


Arist. Pol. Ath. 51°. 
78—82. 

§ 249. τ. μετὰ ταῦτα, i.e. after the 
first excitement, when Philip’s party 
gained courage at Athens.—ovoravrav : 
gen. absol. with the implied antecedent 
of οἷς. 

2. γραφὰς : herein the most restricted 
sense of ordinary public suits, excluding 
εἰσαγγελία, εὔθυναι, etc. The chief form 
of γραφή here would be the γραφὴ παρα- 
νόμων (ὃ 250%). 

3. πάντα ταῦτ᾽: emphatic apposition, 
all these, 1 say.—ov δ ἑαυτῶν, not in 
their own names: at first the leading 
philippizers kept in the background, and 
put forward such obscure men as those 
mentioned below. 

6—8. ἀπόνοια, μανία : “the first is the 
deliberate desperation of a man with 
nothing to lose, the last the desperation 
of blind passion”’ (Simcox).—2Z@oukd€éovs 
...MeXdvrov: Sosicles and Melantus are 
otherwise unknown; for Diondas see 
§ 2225; Philocrates is not the notorious 


‘Hagnusian who gave his name to the 


peace of 346 B.C. (he disappears after he 
was condemned on the εἰσαγγελία brought 
by Hyperides, xix. 116), but an Eleu- 
sinian (XXV. 44). The imitation of this 
passage by Cicero (Cat. III. 7) is familiar: 


See Dinarch, I. 


nar Fe 


4 


ΠΕΡῚ TOY ZTEbANOY 178 


4 4 “A / x Ν ba ὯΝ ’ὔ 
τοίνυν τούτοις πᾶσι μάλιστα μὲν διὰ τοὺς θεοὺς, δεύτερον 

δ hen ata \ v » 3 ΄ 3 ᾽ ΄ 
δὲ Ou ὑμᾶς καὶ τοὺς ἄλλους ᾿Αθηναίους ἐσῳζόμην. δικαίως" τὸ 
τοῦτο γὰρ καὶ ἀληθές ἐστι καὶ ὑπὲρ τῶν ὀμωμοκότων καὶ 
γνόντων τὰ εὔορκα δικαστῶν. 


οὐκοῦν ἐν μὲν οἷς εἰσηγγελ- 250 
λόμην, ὅτ᾽ ἀπεψηφίζεσθέ μου καὶ τὸ μέρος τῶν ψήφων τοῖς 

᾽ὔ 9 4 Ji 3 4 »» , 
διώκουσιν ov μετεδίδοτε, τότ᾽ ἐψηφίζεσθε τἄριστά pe 
πράττειν: ἐν οἷς δὲ τὰς γραφὰς ἀπέφευγον, ἔννομα καὶ 

τ) \ Ψ' 9 ὃ , 9 @ δὲ Ν 3 , 
γράφειν καὶ λέγειν ἀπεδεικνύμην: ἐν ois δὲ Tas εὐθύνας 5 
ἐπεσημαίνεσθε, δικαίως καὶ ἀδωροδοκήτως πάντα πεπρᾶχθαί 
“μοι προσωμολογεῖτε. τούτων οὖν οὕτως ἐχόντων, τί προσῆκον 
ἢ τί δίκαιον ἣν τοῖς ὑπ᾽ ἐμοῦ πεπραγμένοις θέσθαι τὸν 


4τοσνας 


10. 
μωκότων O; ὠμομοκ. V6 (so ὃ 2501). 


γνόντων τὰ εὔορκα Σ, L, At (ἐγνωκότων V6). 


ἄλλους Σ, Li, Ar; ἄλλους ἅπαντας vulg. 


ἐσῳζόμην ἐγώ V 6. II. ὀμω- 
12. ὑπὲρ τῶν τὰ εὔορκα γνόντων vulg.; 


§ 250. 2. τὸ πέμπτον μέρος vulg.; πέμπτον om. Σ, 1,1; cf. 8 103”. ae Μετὰ 
dip. Y. 4. διαγρὰς (!) for γραφὰς Az. ἀπέφευγον 2, L, F, At; ἀπέφυγον 
vulg. 5. Aéy. καὶ ypad. B.-. δὲ καὶ O. 6. μοι πεπρᾶχθαι Α2. 


7. προσομολογεῖτε Ο. 


hoc providebam animo,...nec mihi P. 
Lentuli somnum, nec L. Cassii adipes, nec 
Cethegi furiosam temeritatem pertime- 
scendam. 

το. δι᾿ ὑμᾶς, i.e. through the courts. 

II. ἀληθὲς, 272 accordance with truth. 
--ὑπὲρ.. δικαστῶν, 20 the credit of judges, 
etc. 

12. γνόντων τὰ εὔορκα, who (not only 
had sworn, but) gave judgment in accord- 
ance with their oaths. 

§ 250. 1. ἐν οἷς εἰσηγγελλόμην : cf. 


᾿ ἐν οἷς ἡμάρτανον, ὃ 19°. 


2. τὸ μέρος τῶν ψήφων : cf. 88 1037, 
266°. Here, as in ὃ 103, nearly all Mss. 
(except 2) add πέμπτον. The mention of 
this here is interesting, as it implies that 
at this time some penalty, either partial 
ἀτιμία or the fine of 1000 drachmas, was 
inflicted on the prosecutor who failed to 


_ get one-fifth of the votes in an εἰσαγγελία. 
As this was partly a state prosecution, 


it was right that the individual prosecutor 
should be better protected against personal 
risk than the ordinary γραφόμενος. A 


_ comparison of Hyperides (Lycoph. 8), 


διὰ τὸ ἀκίνδυνον αὐτοῖς εἶναι τὸν ἀγῶνα, 


προσῆκον Σ, L, vulg.; προσῆκεν At. 


with Lycurgus (Leocr. 3), τὸν ἰδίᾳ κιν δυ- 
νεύοντα, and Pollux (VIII. 52, 53), shows 
that in earlier times no penalty was in- 
flicted on the εἰσαγγέλλων who failed to 
get one-fifth of the votes, but that after- 
wards he was subject to the fine without 
the ἀτιμία. See Essay Iv.4 

3. τάἄάριστά pe πράττειν: i.e. the 
judgment of the court justified this clause 
of Ctesiphon’s decree (§ 57!). 

4. ἔννομα γράφειν: opposed to παρά- 
voua γράφειν: see notes on γραφὰς, 
§ 249°. 

5. τὰς εὐθύνας ἐπεσημαίνεσθε, frit 
your seal on my accounts: this probably 
refers to the official seal of the δικαστήριον 
before which Demosth. appeared to ren- 
der his accounts (εὔθυναι) at the end of 
each term of office. We now know from 
Aristotle (Pol. Ath. 4818, 54°) that this 
reference to the court as taking an im- 
portant part in the εὔθυναι was not a mere 
form of words. See Dem. XIX. 211, 
προσελθὼν τοῖς λογισταῖς... ἀπηγόρευε μὴ 
καλεῖν ἐμὲ εἰς τὸ δικαστήριον ὡς δεδω- 
κότα εὐθύνας καὶ οὐκ ὄντα ὑπεύθυνον. 


αἰ al 
44 


_— 


251 


176 


AHMOZOENOY2 


ἴων » 5 ἃ Ss ~ Ἐν ‘4 > 
Κτησιφῶντα ὄνομα; οὐχ ὃ τὸν δῆμον ἑώρα τιθέμενον, οὐχ 
το ὃ τοὺς ὀμωμοκότας δικαστὰς, οὐχ ὃ τὴν ἀλήθειαν παρὰ 


πᾶσι βεβαιοῦσαν; 


Ναὶ, φησὶν, ἀλλὰ τὸ τοῦ Κεφάλου καλὸν, τὸ μηδεμίαν 


γραφὴν φεύγειν. 


a, ‘\ 43> » 4 
καὶ νὴ Δί᾽ εὐδαιμόν γε. 
6 πολλάκις μὲν φυγὼν μηδεπώποτε δ᾽ ἐξελεγχθεὶς ἀδικῶν 31 


ἀλλὰ τί μᾶλλον 


5 5 , / > x \ fa) ΄, ’ὔ ,ὕὔ 
ἐν ἐγκλήματι γίγνοιτ ἂν διὰ τοῦτο δικαίως ; καίτοι πρὸς γε 
5 τοῦτον, ἄνδρες ᾿Αθηναῖοι, καὶ τὸ τοῦ Κεφάλου καλὸν εἰπεῖν 


παρὰ om. Α2. 
φεύγειν Σ, &, Ar; φευγεῖν Β; φυγεῖν Σ (yp), 


9. ὄνομα τὸν Kr. Y, Az. 10. 
ξ 251. 1. room. V6. 2. 
vulg. 3. φυγὼν X, L, vulg.; φεύγων At. 


9. τὸν δῆμον τιθέμενον : this repeated 
approval of the people refers to the votes 
mentioned in § 248. 

ro. ϑικαστὰς : sc. τιθεμένους. The 
present judges are addressed above as if 
they had themselves judged the previous 
cases.—tTrv ἀλήθειαν: with special em- 
phasis, after τὸν δῆμον and τοὺς δικαστὰς. 

This passage is a dignified and fitting 
conclusion to the line of argument be- 
ginning with § 227 concerning the orator’s 
account (Χογισμός) with the state. His 
eloquent reply to the appeal of Aeschines 
to the judges to act as accountants 
naturally led to a statement of the items 
which stood to his credit, giving him a 
new opportunity to enlarge on his services 
to Athens ; and the allusion to εὔθυναι at 
the close gives a unity to the whole. Now, 
after a brief allusion (§ 251) to the case 
of Cephalus, to which Aeschines had 
appealed, he passes to another matter. 

§ 251. 1. τὸ τοῦ Κεφάλου καλὸν 
may be exclamatory, there ἐς the glory of 
Cephalus ; cf.1. 5. But καλὸν is generally 
taken here as predicate to τὸ τοῦ Κεφάλου 
(sc. ἐστί). (See Aesch. 111. 194.) This 
Cephalus is mentioned above, ὃ 219°, with 
Callistratus, Aristophon, and Thrasybulus 
of Collytus, as if he were their con- 
temporary. He therefore cannot be the 
father of Lysias, Polemarchus, and Eu- 
thydemus, who opens the dialogue of 
Plato’s Republic with Socrates, and was 


ἐπὶ γήραος οὐδῷ in the lifetime of Socrates; 
but a laterstatesman, who with Thrasybulus 
of Collytus was a leader of the Theban 
party in Athens, and highly respected. 
Dinarchus (1. 76) speaks of the people of 
Athens as στρατηγῶν μὲν τοιούτων τετυχη- 
κὼς οἵων εἶπον ἀρτίως, συμβούλους δ᾽ ἔχων 
᾿Αρχῖνον καὶ Κέφαλον τὸν Κολλυτέα. The 
generals mentioned were Conon, Iphi- 
crates, Chabrias, and Timotheus; and 
Archinos was one of the restorers of the 
democracy with the great Thrasybulus 
in 403 (Aesch. I. 176, III. 187, 195). 
For Cephalus see Schaefer I. 143, 144.— 
τὸ.. «φεύγειν, the (glory of) mever being 
under indictment: φεύγειν has the-best 
Ms. authority, and the continuity of a 
legal process justifies the tense ; 70...pu- 
γεῖν would mean simply never being 
brought to trial (equally good). Aeschines 
(194), after mentioning the boast of Ari- 


stophon that he had been acquitted (awé- 
gvyev) seventy-five times on the γραφὴ 
παρανόμων, compares this with the higher — 


boast of Cephalus, that he had proposed 
more decrees than any other man, and yet 
had never once been indicted by the 
γραφὴ παρανόμων. 
not mention this special suit, but he evi- 
dently has it in mind here, as in § 2405. 

4. πρός ye τοῦτον, so far as this man 
is concerned; i.e. Aeschines has done 
nothing to prevent me from making the 
boast of Cephalus. 


Demosthenes does — 


pele) Διὰ τ κω 


FOR So Ie 


ea Ba rp 


ot ial 


i 
ΗΜ 
a 
» | 
> | 
= j 
| 
ἢ 


ΠΕΡῚ TOY STEbANOY 177 


κῶν Ν ἮΝ , N , an ἰῷ , , ᾿ ὁ δ᾽ τον 
ἔστι μοι. οὐδεμίαν γὰρ πώποτ᾽ ἐγράψατό με οὐδ᾽ ἐ iw&e 
γραφὴν, @OTE ὑπὸ σοῦ γ᾽ ὡμολόγημαι μηδὲν εἶναι τοῦ 
; , ͵ / 
Κεφάλου χείρων πολίτης. 
ανταχόθεν μὲν τοίνυν ἄν τις ἴδοι τὴν ἀγνωμοσύνη 
9 tal \ \ , 9 ψ “9 ee ἢ Ne Ὑ ;ι 
αὐτοῦ καὶ τὴν βασκανίαν, οὐχ ἥκιστα δ᾽ ἀφ᾽ ὧν περὶ τῆς 
4 , > - > [2 Ψ » mY 
τύχης διελέχθη. [eye δ᾽ ὅλως μὲν, ὅστις ἄνθρωπος ὧν 
ε wn ἃ 
ἀνθρώπῳ τύχην προφέρει, ἀνόητον ἡγοῦμαι" ἣν γὰρ ὁ 
βέλτιστα πράττειν νομίζων καὶ ἀρίστην ἔχειν οἰόμενος οὐκ 5 
οἷδεν εἰ μενεῖ τοιαύτη μέχρι τῆς ἑσπέρας, πῶς χρὴ περὶ 
; ΄ὕ , ΕῪ A 9 , δὴν» 9 Sy x a N 
ταύτης λέγειν ἢ πῶς ὀνειδίζειν ἑτέρῳ; ἐπειδὴ οὗτος πρὸς 
πολλοῖς ἄλλοις καὶ περὶ τούτων ὑπε φάνως χρῆται τῷ λόγῳ 
ρ βη υς Χρὴ Ὁ Λοόγῷ, 

ἦ 9 > » 3 A Ν 4 b) Y Ἁ 
σκέψασθ᾽, ὦ ἄνδρες ᾿Αθηναῖοι, καὶ θεωρήσαθ᾽' ὅσῳ καὶ 
ἀληθέστερον καὶ ἀνθρωπινώτερον ἐγὼ περὶ τῆς τύχης τούτου το 

, 5 ᾿ς, X\ ΄“ ,ὕὔ 4 9 Ν 
διαλεχθήσομαι. ἐγὼ τὴν τῆς πόλεως τύχην ἀγαθὴν 258 


Ν 


6. ἔστιν ἐμοί Y. 
§ 252. τ. 


ἀνόητον vulg. ; παντ. om. Σ, L, F, ΒΙ 
βέλτ. L, vulg.; τὰ om. Σ΄, Φᾧ. 
μένεϊ L (accent on ε erased). 


κέχρηται vulg. τῷ om. Y. IO. 
λέξομαι Y, ᾧ (yp), B. 
8 253. I. 


6. ἐδίωξε γραφὴν, prosecuted an in- 
dictment, cognate accusative, as in éypd- 
Waro ypapnv. Our translation obscures 
the construction. 

7. μηδὲν εἶναι: see M. T. 685. 


§$ 252—275. Here Demosthenes re- 
plies at great length to scattered remarks 
of Aeschines about his ‘‘bad fortune,” 
which involved in calamity every person, 
state, or thing which he touched. Though 
Aeschines refers only to his general for- 
tune, \emosthenes chooses to speak 
chiefly of his fortunes in life, which he 
compares with those of his opponent. 
He concludes (§§ 270—275) with some 
forcible remarks on his fortune in the 
other sense. 


ὃ 252. 1. ἀγνωμοσύνην (cf. 88 943, 
207°), want of feeling. 
G. D. 


πανταχόθεν Σ, L; πολλαχόθεν vulg. a3 
over εἰ), L1 (Ὁ); deed. περὶ τ. τύχης Y; διελέγχθη (y erased) 2. 
ἡγοῦμαι καὶ ἀπαίδευτον, At. 2. 
ἔχειν om. V6. 
τοιαύτη μενεῖ Al. 2. 
8. ὑπερηφάνως x, L, ᾧ (yp). At. 2; ὑπερηφάνῳ vulg. 
δικαιότερον (for καὶ ἀληθ.) At. 11. δια- 


διειλέχθη &, Β! (ε 

4. παντελῶς 

Ἐπ τὰ 

6. μένει Z (accent by corr.); 
μέχρι καὶ Α 2. 

χρῆται Σ, L, ᾧ (yp); 


Thy THs 1 F, BY, Ar; τὴν. μὲν. τῆς vulg. 


2. περὶ τῆς τύχης: see Aesch. III. 
114, 157, 158, with 135, 1363 cf..§ 212 
(above). 

3. ὅλως μὲν is opposed to the special 
exception, ἐπειδὴ δ᾽ οὗτος (7). 

4- ἣν, after suggesting the object of 
ἔχειν, is the object of οἶδεν. 

5. βέλτιστα πράττειν : superlative of 
εὖ πράττειν. See Soph. O. C. 567: ἔξοιδ᾽ 
ἀνὴρ wy χώὦώτι THs és αὔριον οὐδὲν πλέον μοι 
σοῦ μέτεστιν ἡμέρας (Weil). 

8. ὑπερηφάνως : opposed to ἀνθρω- 
πινώτερον, nore humanly, i.e. more as one 
man should speak of another: cf. ὅστις... 
προφέρει (3).---χρῆται τῷ λόγῳ : cf. εἰ 
δικαίως χρήσομαι τῷ λόγῳ, ὃ 233°. 

§ 258. 1. τὴν... τύχην : the general 
good fortune of Athens, as it is here 
understood, is not mere chance or luck 


(as in §§ 2076 and 306°), but the result of 


12 


178 


ε la) \ awd tee a lal \ Ἂς Zz Ν ὃ A ee 

ἡγοῦμαι, Kal ταῦθ᾽ ὁρῶ Kat τὸν Ata τὸν Awdwvatoy ὑμῖν 

la aA la 

μαντευόμενον, τὴν μέντοι TOV πάντων ἀνθρώπων, ἡ νῦν 
ΒΡ \ \ : ΄ ἈΝ ΤῈ ΄ ἂν ΠΣ , 

ἐπέχει, χαλεπὴν καὶ δεινήν" Tis yap Ἑλλήνων ἢ Tis βαρβάρων 

254 οὐ πολλῶν κακῶν ἐν τῷ παρόντι πεπείραται; τὸ μὲν τοίνυν | 

an ε ; 

προελέσθαι τὰ κάλλιστα, καὶ τὸ τῶν οἰηθέντων Ελλήνων 

εἰ πρόοινθ᾽ ἡμᾶς ἐν εὐδαιμονίᾳ διάξειν αὐτῶν ἄμεινον 
πρ ἡμ μονίς μ 


2. ἡγοῦμαι om. ®. 
ΩΝ F2, Φ, A2, V6. 
(mg.), L 
καιρῷ vulg.; καιρᾷ om. Σ, L}, 

§ 254. 3. 
av (for ἐν) A2; av ἐν ®. 
τούτων αὐτών Al. 23 αὐτῶν ἐκείνων vulg. 


® (yp). ἐβουλόμεθ᾽ Ar. ὑμῖν F. 


F, ®, Ar. 


divine protection and the care of the 
Gods. See the poem of Solon, quoted in 
XIX. 255, which begins 
Ἡμετέρα δὲ πόλις κατὰ μὲν Διὸς οὔποτ᾽ 
ὀλεῖται 

αἶσαν καὶ μακάρων θεῶν φρένας ἀθανάτων " 
τοίη γὰρ μεγάθυμος ἐπίσκοπος ὀβριμοπάτρη 

Παλλὰς ᾿Αθηναίη χεῖρας ὕπερθεν ἔχει" 
with the orator’s comment (256), ἐγὼ δ᾽ 
del μὲν ἀληθῆ τὸν λόγον τοῦτον ἡγοῦμαι 
καὶ βούλομαι, ὡς ἄρ᾽ οἱ θεοὶ σῴζουσιν ἡμῶν 
τὴν πόλιν. (See notes of Dissen and 
Blass.) So Iv. 12: (τῆς τύχης) ἥπερ ἀεὶ 
βέλτιον ἢ ἡμεῖς ἡμῶν αὐτῶν ἐπιμελούμεθα. 

2. τὸν... Δωδωναῖον: cf. Il. XVI. 233, 
Zed ἄνα Awdwvaie, Πελασγικὲ τηλόθι 
ναίων, in the prayer of Achilles. Oracles 
sent from Dodona to Athens are quoted 
by Demosthenes, ΧΧΙ. 53; cf. XIX. 299, 
ὁ Ζεὺς, ἡ Διώνη (the Queen of Zeus at 
Dodona), πάντες of θεοί. At this time 
Dodona was probably more revered at 
Athens because of the Macedonian in- 
fluence at Delphi: cf. Aesch. III. 130, 
Δημοσθένης δὲ ἀντέλεγε, φιλιππίζειν τὴν 
Πυθίαν φάσκων, ἀπαίδευτος ὧν κ.τ.λ. 

3. τῶν πάντων ἀνθρώπων, mankind 
in general, as opposed to Athens alone. 

5. πολλῶν κακῶν: witness the de- 
struction of Thebes by Alexander; and 
the overthrow of the Persian Empire, 
which was then going on. See Aesch. 


AHMOZOENOY2 


, “Ἂ > A VA a / > / Ἂς Ν 
πράττειν, τῆς ἀγαθῆς τύχης τῆς πόλεως εἶναι τίθημι" τὸ δὲ 
ς προσκροῦσαι καὶ μὴ πάνθ᾽. ὡς ἠβουλόμεθ᾽ ἡμῖν συμβῆναι 31 
ταῦθ᾽ ΣΡ L, F, ®, Ar; τοῦδ vulg. 


καὶ τὸν ᾿Απόλλω (Απολλων Ar) τὸν Πύθιον after ὑμῖν Σ 
(corr. ), Ax (mg.), B (yp) without καὶ. 


TpoowTo 3 πρόοιντο L, At, Une vulg. ; 
αὐτών Σ, Φ; αὐτοὺς Σ (yp); αὐτων (ods over wv) F; 


ὑμῖν Σ, L, vulg.; ἡμῖν 


-ο- οὕ. - - τ τ χε-- .-.- τ 


2. ἁπάντωνΎΥ. 5. παρόντι 


προεῖντο O, B. ὑμᾶς F. 


5. ὅσα (for ws) Ar. 2, Y, F (yp), 


III. 132, 133; in 134 he includes Athens 
in the general bad fortune which she 
owes to the baneful influence of Demos- 
thenes. 
8254. 1. τὸ προελέσθαι τὰ κάλλιστα, 
our choice of the most glorious course: the 
whole sentence through ἄμεινον πράττειν is 
the subject of εἶναι (4), i.e. he includes all 
this in the special good fortune of Athens. 
2. οἰηθέντων introduces εἰ mpdowd’... 
διάξειν in or. obl.: mpdowro has the best 
Ms. authority here, and in Vv. 15 and XXI. 
212; but 2! has πρόεισθε in VI. 8. , 
3. αὐτῶν: intensive with τῶν Ἑλλή- _ 
νων, than those very Greeks; almost — 
reiterative.—dpewvov πράττειν: cf. βέλ- 
τιστα πράττειν, § 252°. He compares the 
fate of Athens under the Macedonian 
supremacy with that of the Peloponne- 
sians who remained neutral in the late — 
war and the Thessalians who sided with 


Philip : see 88 64, 65. 
4. τῆς τύχης with εἶναι τίθημι: see — 
I. 10, TO μὲν γὰρ πολλὰ arohwAEeKevat...THS 


ἡμετέρας ἀμελείας ἄν τις θείη δικαίως (with — : 
the following τὸ δὲ... θείην), where εἶναι α΄ 
omitted. τίθημι in this sense takes 86. 
infinitive regularly in or. οὐδ. : see Aesch. j 
111. 163, βούλει σε θῶ φοβηθῆναι καὶ xe 


κροῦσαι Kal μὴ.. ἐσυμβήναι ει i.e. our 
disaster (euphemistically called colina 4 


ΠΕΡΙ. TOY STEPANOY 179 


τῆς τῶν ἄλλων ἀνθρώπων τύχης τὸ ἐπιβάλλον ἐφ᾽ ἡμᾶς 
μέρος μετειληφέναι νομίζω τὴν πόλιν. τὴν δ᾽ ἰδίαν τύχην 255 
Ρ ἈΝ ΤΙΝ ἢ Ν \ er ἢ ε a crate 3 A ἰδί 3 , 

τὴν ἐμὴν καὶ τὴν ἑνὸς ἡμῶν ἑκάστου ἐν τοῖς ἰδίοις ἐξετάζειν 
δίκαιον εἶναι νομίζω. ἐγὼ μὲν οὑτωσὶ περὶ τῆς τύχης ἀξιῶ, 
ὀρθῶς καὶ δικαίως, ὡς ἐμαυτῷ δοκῶ, νομίζω δὲ καὶ ὑμῖν' 


ε Ἂς Ν 50. 4 \ > \ A a lal , 
ὁ δὲ τὴν ἰδίαν τύχην τὴν ἐμὴν τῆς κοινῆς τῆς πόλεως κυριω- 5 
τέραν εἶναί φησι, τὴν μικρὰν καὶ φαύλην τῆς ἀγα ἢ: καὶ 
μεγάλης. καὶ πῶς ἔνι τοῦτο γενέσθαι; 
Καὶ μὴν εἴ γε τὴν ἐμὴν τύχην πάντως ἐξετάζειν, Αἰσχίνη, 256 
-προαιρεῖ, πρὸς τὴν σαυτοῦ σκόπει, κἂν εὕρῃς τὴν ἐμὴν 
βελτίω τῆς σῆς, παῦσαι λοιδορούμενος αὐτῇ. σκόπει τοίνυν 
3 *% > > “~ ᾽ν Ν Ν la / 
εὐθὺς ἐξ ἀρχῆς. Kai μου πρὸς Διὸς μηδεμίαν ψυχρότητα 
A ¥ 
καταγνῷ μηδείς. ἐγὼ yap οὔτ᾽ εἴ τις πενίαν προπηλακίζει, 5 
ἴων » Ε A“ y 9 ¥ > > ta * 5 Ν 4 
νοῦν ἔχειν ἡγοῦμαι, οὔτ᾽ εἴ τις ἐν ἀφθόνοις τραφεὶς ἐπὶ τούτῳ 
, 5 Φ aoe ἂς “A \ “ ἰφ , 
σεμνύνεται" ἀλλ᾽ ὑπὸ τῆς τουτουὶ τοῦ χαλεποῦ βλασφημίας 
καὶ συκοφαντίας εἰς τοιούτους λόγους ἐμπίπτειν ἀναγκάζομαι, 
& lanl 
οἷς ἐκ TOV ἐνόντων ὡς ἂν δύνωμαι μετριώτατα χρήσομαι. 


6. ὑμᾶς V6. 7. péposom. ΑἹ. 

§ 255. 2. ὑμῶν Ar, Y, Φ. 3. νομίζω εἷναι V6. μὲν οὖν vulg.; οὖν 
om. Σ, L!, Ar. ἀξιῶ Σ, Ar; ἐξετάζειν ἀξιώ 1,, vulg. 4. bu 2, Lo Aws 
ὑμῖν συνδοκεῖν vulg. = τὴν ἰδίαν.. τῆς πό (i.e. one line) om. Ar (-Aews remaining 
at beginning of next line), added in mg. 

§ 256. 2. προαιρεῖ 2; προαιρῇ L, vulg. σεαυτοῦ x, L, V6, West., Lips. ; 
σαυτοῦ vulg., Bk., Vom., BI. 4. Διὸς Σ, L1; "Διὸς καὶ θεῶν vulg. 5. προ- 
πηλακίζει,ν ov exew (7 over o, and ν added above ov) Σ, making προπηλακίζει, νοῦν. 
7. τούτου V6. Q. μετριώτατα (not -nra) Σ. 


_ and our not having everything doneas we Aesch. quotes Hesiod (Works and Days 
_ wished: this is the object of μετειληφέναι, 240 ff.) against Demosthenes. 

with τὸ... μέρος as appositive, this 7 believe 3. ἀξιώ, a ‘‘eine seltene Bedeuts 
that our city has received as the share of ung (Hat. vi. 87, ἀξιοῦντες ἀδικέεσθαι),᾽ 
the general (bad) fortune of the rest of Bl. But here ἀξιῶ is not equivalent to 


mankind which falls to our Jot. νομίζω, but οὑτωσὶ ἀξιῶ Ξ-- τοῦτο ἄξιον εἶναι 
6. τὸ ἐπιβάλλον μέρος: cf. τὸ yyvd- νομίζω. 

μενον, the guota, ὃ. 104%. West. quotes 4. νομίζω ὑμῖν: sc. δοκεῖν. 

Aidt. Iv. 115, ἀπολαχόντες τῶν κτημά- 8 256. 4. Ψυχρότητα, coldness, want 


τῶν τὸ ἐπιβάλλον, and Diod. 1. 1, τὸ of feeling: οἵ. τὸ ψυχρὸν τοῦτο ὄνομα, XIX. 
ἐπιβάλλον ἑκάστοις ἐκ τῆς πεπρωμένης 187, with Shilleto’s note. 

μερίζουσα. Cf. ἐπιβάλλει, § 272°. 7. χαλεποῦ, harsh, unfeeling, stronger 
ὃ 255. 2. ἐν τοῖς ἰδίοις : Aesch. had than ψυχροῦ. 

_ sought for the fortune of Demosth. ἐν 9. ἐκ TOV...peTpLOTaTA, as moderately 
"Tots δημοσίοις, as in III. 114, συμβέβηκεν as the state of the case (τὰ ἐνόντα) will 
αὐτῷ ὅτου dv προσάψηται...τούτων ἑκάστους permit. The δύναμαι which is commonly 
_ aviarous συμφοραῖς περιβάλλειν. In 135 omitted with ὡς and the superlative is 


Mia 


180 AHMOSOENOYS 


> \ Ν , ε ἴω 5 v4 δὶ w ld 
Ἐμοὶ μὲν τοίνυν ὑπῆρξεν, Αἰσχίνη, παιδὶ τὰ προσήκοντα 
νὰ τ οΠροοοκτοΈΆυι κι 2 
διδασκαλεῖα, καὶ ἔχειν ὅσα χρὴ TOV μηδὲν αἰσχρὸν ποιήσοντα 
δι’ ἔνδειαν, ἐξελθόντι δ᾽ ἐκ παίδων ἀκόλουθα τούτοις πράττειν, 
»ο-. Νὰ ~ 3 
χορηγεῖν, τριηραρχεῖν, εἰσφέρειν, μηδεμιᾶς φιλοτιμίας μήτ 
3 , , 4 5 , 5 " XA “ va Ν 
ἰδίας μὴτε δημοσίας ἀπολείπεσθαι, ἀλλὰ καὶ τῇ πόλει καὶ 
τοῖς φίλοις χρήσιμον εἶναι" Ἰἐπειδὴ δὲ πρὸς τὰ κοινὰ προσ- 
A ἴω ν 
ελθεῖν ἔδοξέ μοι, τοιαῦτα πολιτεύμαθ᾽ Jréo bad ὥστε καὶ 
ὑπὸ τῆς πατρίδος καὶ ὑπ᾽ ἄλλων “Ἑλλήνων πολλῶν πολλάκις; 
5 la “ Ν \ Ν 3 Ν cere ε 3 , > 
ἐστεφανῶσθαι, Kal μηδὲ τοὺς ἐχθροὺς ὑμᾶς ὡς οὐ καλά γ᾽ 
§ 257. I. παιδὶ Σ, 1.1; παιδὶ μὲν ὄντι φοιτᾶν εἰς > (mg. not yp), L (yp), vulg. 
2. καὶ ἔχειν... δι᾽ ἔνδειαν om. Al. 2. παιδίων At. τἀκόλουθα A2, 


πον: 6. προσῆλθον L (corr.), Φ, Ο. 8. ὑπ᾽ ἄλλων ᾿Ελλ. πολλῶν Σ, L; 
ὑπὸ τῶν ἄλλων Ἕλλ. vulg. 9. ἐστεφανοῦσθαι Ο. καὶ μὴ At. ὀυκαλ- 


λαγῆναι προειλόμην Σ, οὐ καλα γε nv ἃ προειλόμην = (yp). 


oftener expressed in the subjunctive (as 
here) or the optative than in the indica- 
tive. Its frequent insertion shows that 
it was always felt. See especially such 
complicated expressions as Plat. Rep. 
3856, καθ᾽ ὅσον ἀνθρώπῳ ἐπὶ πλεῖστον οἷόν 
τε, to the greatest extent possible for man, 
which without ἀνθρώπῳ would be about 
equivalent to ws ἐπὶ πλεῖστον : ἀνθρώπῳ is 
added, limiting οἷόν τε (-- δυνατόν), as ἐκ 
τῶν ἐνόντων here limits δύνωμαι. We have 
again an apology, perhaps an honest one, 
for the personal vituperation which fol- 
lows, 88 257—262. 

§257. 1. ὑπῆρξεν : the subjects are 
διδασκαλεῖα and the. infinitives -éxew and 
πράττειν, with ἑλέσθαι (7). Most MSs. 
insert μὲν ὄντι φοιτᾶν eis after mardl.— 
προσήκοντα, i.e. such as children of 
the better classes attended: one of the 


- charges against his guardian Aphobus 


(XXVII. 46) is τοὺς διδασκάλους τοὺς μι- 
σθοὺς ἀπεστέρηκε. 

2. τὸν... ποιήσοντα = ὃς ποιήσει, he 
who is to do etc. (M.T. 527, 530).— 
αἰσχρὸν, i.e. ἀνελεύθερον : this idea of the 
ignobility of toil is a commonplace with 
the Greeks, as a slave-holding people. 
Cf. Ar. Av. 1432, τί yap πάθω; σκάπτειν 
γὰρ οὐκ ἐπίσταμαι. 

3. ἀκόλουθα πράττειν is explained by 
the rest of the clause, χορηγεῖν... χρήσιμον 
εἶναι. 


4. χορηγεῖν, τριηραρχεῖν : testimony 


about all his λῃτουργίαι is given in § 267. 
He was χορηγός in 350 B.C., when he 
was assaulted by Midias (ΧΧΙ. 13ff.); for 
his numerous trierarchies see XXI. 78, 
154, Aesch. III. 51, 52, and cf. § 99° 


(above).—elorépetv, to pay the elopopd, 


or property-tax: this was assessed “‘ pro- 
gressively,” the richer being taxed on a 
larger proportion (τίμημα) of their actual 
property than the poorer. (See Zzsphora 
in Smith’s Dict. Antig.) The guardians 
of Demosthenes, to conceal their pecu- 
lations, continued to enroll their ward in 
the highest class, so that he paid taxes on 
atlunua of one-fifth of his property (οὐσία), 
whereas he should have been placed in a 
much lower class after the inroads upon 
the estate. See XXVII. 7, els yap τὴν 
συμμορίαν ὑπὲρ ἐμοῦ συνετάξαντο κατὰ 
τὰς πέντε καὶ εἴκοσι μνᾶς πεντακοσίας δραχ- 
μὰς εἰσφέρειν, ὅσον περ...οἱ τὰ μέγιστα 
κεκτημένοι τιμήματα εἰσέφερον, i.e. they 
had me so enrolled that I should be 
assessed on a τίμημα of 500 drachmas 
(i.e. 5 minae) for every 25 minae of my 
estate: in XXVIII. 4 this is said to have 
made him a leader of the symmory 
(ἡγεμὼν τῆς cummoplas) : see also XXIX. 59, 


and Boeckh, Staatsh. I. p. 599. See note 


on § 103°. 

7. ὥστε, with perfect and present in- 
finitive: M.T. 590, 109. 

9. ἐστεφανῶσθαι: see §§ 83, 120, 
222, 223. . 


[ 


<n erp nM 


ΠΈΡΙ TOY ΣΤΕΦΑΝΟΥ 


181 


> a 4 3 a , κι t4 87, ΄ 

ἣν ἃ προειλόμην ἐπιχειρεῖν λέγειν. | ἐγὼ μὲν δὴ τοιαύτῃ 258 
Pa , Ν / > “Δ 3 ν 3 3 “A Ν 

συμβεβίωκα τύχῃ, καὶ πόλλ᾽ ἂν ἔχων ἐτερ εἰπεῖν περὶ 

αὐτῆς παραλείπω, φυλαττόμενος τὸ λυπῆσαί τιν᾽ ἐν οἷς 


4 xX 2c € Ν 3 N μὴ » Ν ” 
σέμνυνομᾶαι. συ ὃ O σεμνος avy) Pp και διαπτύων τους ἄλλους 


σκόπει πρὸς ταύτην ποίᾳ τινὶ κέχρησαι τύχῃ, δι’ ἣν παῖς 5 
μὲν ὧν μετὰ πολλῆς τῆς ἐνδείας ἐτράφης, ἅμα τῷ πατρὶ πρὸς 
τῷ διδασκαλείῳ προσεδρεύων, τὸ μέλαν τρίβων καὶ τὰ βάθρα 
σπογγίζων καὶ τὸ παιδαγωγεῖον κορῶν, οἰκέτου τάξιν οὐκ 


ἐλευθέρου παιδὸς ἔχων, ἀνὴρ δὲ γενόμενος τῇ μητρὶ τελούσῃ 259 


8 258. 1. δὴ οἵ. O. 2. 


© (yp), ΒΞ; αὐτὴν O; ταυτὶ O (yp). 


τῆς ἐνδείας L: see Vomel. 
8 259. 1. καὶ τῇ A2. 


IO. ἃ προειλόμην, i.e. τὴν ἐμὴν mpoal- 
pec: cf. § τροῦ. 

ὃ 258. 2. συμβεβίωκα.. εἰπεῖν : an 
accidental dactylic hexameter.—éAN’ av 
éxav= 7dr’ dv ἔχοιμι, though 7 might 
ete: cf. §-138'”. 

3. φυλαττόμενος τὸ λυπῆσαι (M.T. 
374): the object infinitive takes the place 
of μὴ λυπήσω, which in use had become 
an object clause (M.T. 303 C). 

6. πρὸς τῷ διδασκαλείῳ : see notes on 
§ 1297-4. 

7. προσεδρεύων, attending (asa servant). 
--τὸ μέλαν τρίβων: the ink was probably 
rubbed from a cake (like India ink) and 
mixed with water. 

8. παιδαγωγεῖον, probably a room in 
which the παιδαγωγοί, slaves who brought 
the boys to and from school, waited for 
these to be ready to go home: later it 
was used like διδασκαλεῖον for a school- 
room.—oikérov...éxav: the mention of 
these menial duties implies the same 
_ condition of father and son as appears in 
§ 129: but see Blass. 

§ 259. In this section and § 260 we 
have a lively comic description, highly 
caricatured, of some Asiatic ceremonies 
of initiation, in which the mother of 
Aeschines is said to have taken part. 
This was some form of Bacchic worship, 


περὶ αὐτῆς om. V6. 2: 

4- σεμνὸς vulg., most rec. edd.; σεμνυνόμενος Σ, L, Vom. 5. 
ποίᾳ Σ ; ὁποίᾳ ᾧ, Ar; ποίᾳ δὴ O. 
τίνι vulg.; Τοίνυν corr. to τινὶ 1,1; τινα Ο. 6. 


τινας (for τιν᾽ A2. 

ταύτῃ Y, F (yp), 
τινὶ 
τῆς om. vulg.; Τὴν ἐνδείας Σ ; 


with perhaps a mixture of Orphic mys- 
teries. It seems there was ἃ written 
service (τὰς βίβλου) which Aeschines 
read like a clerk while his mother 
officiated as priestess. The initiation of 
Strepsiades into the Socratic mysteries 
(Ar. Nub. 255—262) probably carica- 
tures some similar worship. Plato, Rep. 
364E, says of books of Musaeus and 
Orpheus, βίβλων dé ὅμαδον παρέχονται 
Μουσαίου καὶ ᾿Ορφέως,... καθ’ ἃς θυηπο- 
λοῦσι, πείθοντες οὐ μόνον ἰδιώτας ἀλλὰ καὶ 
πόλεις, ὡς ἄρα λύσεις τε καὶ καθαρμοὶ 
ἀδικημάτων διὰ θυσιῶν καὶ παιδιᾶς ἡδονῶν 
εἰσὶ μὲν ἔτι ζῶσιν, εἰσὶ δὲ καὶ τελευτήσασιν, 
...al τῶν ἐκεῖ κακῶν ἀπολύουσιν ἡμᾶς. 

See J. H. Wright in Harvard Studies 
inr Class. /Philols Ψ1. ῬΡε τ» 68. Fle 
makes Glaucothea represent a female 
μητραγύρτης, or priestess of Cybele, the 
Great Mother (μήτηρ θεῶν), and Aeschines 
a μηναγύρτη», or priest of Mén (Sabazius). 
Strabo, p. 471, says that the scene in De- 
mosthenes contains Σαβάζια καὶ Μητρῴῷα. 

I. τῇ μητρὶ τελουσῃ: see XIX. 281, 
Τλαυκοθέας τῆς τοὺς θιάσους συναγούσης, 
ἐφ᾽ οἷς ἑτέρα τέθνηκεν ἱέρεια, and cf. 240. 
In XIX. 199 we have τὰς βίβλους ἀνα- 
γιγνώσκοντά σε TH μητρὶ τελούσῃ, Kal παῖδ᾽ 
ὄντ᾽ ἐν θιάσοις καὶ μεθύουσιν ἀνθρώποις 
καλινδούμενον. 


—_—-  ν νυν» 9οι--.- 


κα ee 


τ οἱ ἜΣ. ὦ. - 


182 AHMOSOENOY2 


Ν ΄, Ψ / Ν A “A \ 
τὰς βίβλους ἀνεγίγνωσκες καὶ ταλλα συνεσκευωρου, τὴν 


μὲν νύκτα νεβρίζων καὶ κρατηρίζων καὶ καθαίρων τοὺς 


\ / “ν Bs ΜΝ Ὁ ΄ Ν 
τελουμένους καὶ ἀπομάττων τῷ πηλῴ καὶ τοις πιτύροις, καὶ 


> \ ee A rn ΄ ΄ » Ν 
ανιστας ATO Του καθαρμοῦ κελεύων λέγειν ἔφυγον Κακον, 


@ » Ses aA / ΄ pee J 8 ΄ 
εὗρον ἄμεινον, ἐπὶ τῷ μηδένα πώποτε τηλικοῦτ ὀλολύξαι 


2. συνεσκευώρου Σ, 1.1, vulg. 
5. avioras 2, L, At. 2, ΒΓ ἀνασταν vulg. 
6. τηλικοῦτ᾽ Σ, L;3 τηλικοῦτον vulg. 


καὶ τὴν Φ. 4. 


2. τἄλλα συνεσκενυωροῦ, you helped to 
conduct the rest of the ceremony: oKevw- 
podua is properly look after σκεύη (of any 
kind), and generally manage, direct, 
devise, concoct (often in a bad sense): 
cf, IX. 17, τὰ ἐν Πελοποννήσῳ σκευωρού- 
μενον (of Philip). See σκευωρία and 
σκευωρός. 

3. νεβρίζων and κρατηρίζων are pro- 
bably transitive and govern τοὺς τελου- 
μένους, like καθαίρων, ἀπομάττων, and 
ἀνιστάς, i.e. dressing them in fawnskins 
and drenching them with wine. See Eur. 
Bacch. 24, veBpid’ ἐξάψας χροός, and 
Sandys’ note. They are sometimes taken 
as neuter, meaning dressing yourself in 
a fawnskin and pouring out wine. Har- 
pocration has, of μὲν ws τοῦ τελοῦντος 
νεβρίδα ἐνημμένου ἢ καὶ τοὺς τελουμένους 
διαζωννύντος νεβρίσιν * οἱ δὲ ἐπὶ τοῦ νεβροὺς 
διασπᾶν κατά τινα ἄρρητον λόγον (i.e. as 
symbolic of the sufferings of Dionysus). 
Photius explains κρατηρίζων by oivor... 
ἀπὸ κρατήρων ἐν τοῖς μυστηρίοις σπένδων. 
Dissen quotes the passive ἐκρατηρίσθη- 
μεν Ξκεἐμεθύσθημεν from Hesychius. 

4. ἀπομάττων: Harpocration says: 
οἱ μὲν ἁπλοϊκώτερον ἀκούουσιν ἀντὶ τοῦ 
ἀποψῶν καὶ λυμαινόμενος" ἄλλοι δὲ περιερ- 
γότερον, οἷον περιπλάττων τὸν. πηλὸν καὶ 
τὰ πίτυρα τοῖς τελουμένοις, ὡς λέγομεν 
ἀπομάττεσθαι τὸν ἀνδριάντα πηλῷ" ἤλειφον 
γὰρ τῷ πηλῷ καὶ τῷ πιτύρῳ τοὺς μυομένους, 
ἐκμιμούμενοι τὰ μυθολογούμενα παρ᾽ ἐνίοις, 
ὡς ἄρα οἱ Τιτᾶνες τὸν Διόνυσον ἐλυμήναντο 
γύψῳ καταπλασάμενοι ἐπὶ τῷ μὴ γνώριμοι 
γενέσθαι. Dissen quotes Wyttenbach’s 
note on Plut. Mor. p. 166 A: ‘ Lustra- 
tionis pars erat ut corpus lustrandum 
circumlineretur et quasi circumpinseretur 


ἀπομμάτων At. 
κελεύων Σ, At, B; καὶ κελεύων L, vulg. 


imprimis luto, πηλῴ, tum abstergeretur, 
quorum illud est περιμάττειν, hoc ἀπο- 
μάττειν, sed utrumque promiscue de tota 
lustratione dicitur.” The whole expres- 
sion then seems to mean plastering them 


over with the clay and then rubbing them 


clean with the bran. 

5. ἀνιστὰς: the victim is supposed 
to be sitting during the operation, like 
Strepsiades (Nub. 256).—kaSappot: for 
the full force of this word see the 
passages above quoted under 1. 4; the 
process was a purification and also a 
charm.—keAevwyv, subordinate to ἀνιστὰς : 
1.6. making him get up as he bids him 
say, etc.—épvyov κακὸν, εὗρον ἄμεινον : 
this formula was borrowed from initia- 
tions and other ceremonies of a higher 
character, meaning that a new life had 
opened as the result of the ceremony just 
ended. Suidas gives (under ἔφυγον... 
ἄμεινον): τάττεται ἐπὶ τών ἀπὸ κακοῦ els 
κρεῖττον ἐλθόντων. ἔθος γὰρ ᾿Αθήνησιν ἐν 
γάμοις στέφεσθαι ἀμφιθαλῆ παῖδα ἀκάνθας 
μετὰ δρυΐνων καρπῶν καὶ φέροντα λίκνον 
πλῆρες ἄρτων λέγειν τὸ προκείμενον, αἱ- 
νισσόμενον τὴν ἐπὶ τὸ κρεῖττον μεταβολήν. 
τὸ γὰρ ἐκ τῶν δρυῶν καὶ ἀκανθῶν στέμμα 
κακὸν ἔλεγον. See Eustath. p. 1726, and 
[Plut.] Prov. Alex. xvi. The saying 
(Eustathius calls it a παροιμία) originally 
referred to the change from the acorns 
and thistles of primitive life to the more 
civilized bread, but was used at weddings 
and in other ceremonies. The words 
form a paroemiac, and probably belonged 
to some metrical formula. 

6. ὀλολύξαι, used especially of crées 
or shouts in religious worship or prayers : 
see Od. Iv. 767, ws εἰποῦσ᾽ ὀλόλυξε (after 


ἕω, FORO, Hy 


oS reat 


1 Pn ds Te aati 


Bo 55". : 


~ oo 


— 


ΠΕΡῚ TOY STEPANOY 183 


; δ Ν » / \ \ » > τὰς 
σεμνυνόμενος (καὶ ἔγωγε νομίζω: μὴ γὰρ οἴεσθ᾽ αὐτὸν 
φθέγγεσθαι μὲν οὕτω μέγα, ὀλολύζειν δ᾽ οὐχ ὑπέρλαμπρον), 

| 2 \ eg ¢ / Ν Ν᾿ / » Ν las ε ἴω 
᾿ ἐν δὲ ταῖς Ἡμέραις τοὺς καλοὺς θιάσους αγων διὰ τῶν ὁδῶν, 260 


ee 

> 
ΓΕ 

7 


ἘΣ 
Ε. 


‘ 3 , A , \ “ , \ » 
τοὺς ἐστεφανωμένους τῷ μαράθῳ καὶ τῇ λεύκῃ, τοὺς ὄφεις 
} Σ “he , θλί be ay λὴ Ν ~ An > lal ἢ A“ 
| τοὺς παρείας θλίβων καὶ ὑπὲρ τῆς κεφαλῆς αἰωρῶν, καὶ βοῶν 
εὐοῖ σαβοῖ, καὶ ἐπορχούμενος UNS ἅττης ἄττης VS, 
» 
ἔξαρχος καὶ προηγεμὼν καὶ κιττοφόρος καὶ λικνοφόρος καὶ 5 


8 260. 2. 


μαράθῳ Σ, L, vulg.; μαράθρῳ V6. 


παρίας Ar, Bi. 


4. evoaBo. (οι over va) 2D; ev σαβοι (οι over ev) F; εὖ of σαβοι B; εὖ of σάβοι L; 


evot Σαβοῖ Harpocr., vulg. 


(See Vomel.) λυκνοφόρος A2. 


a prayer); Aeschyl. Eum. 1043, ὀλολύ- 
gare viv ἐπὶ μολπαῖς: Eur. Bacch. 689, 
ὠλόλυξεν ἐν μέσαις σταθεῖσα Βάκχαις. 

8. φθέγγεσθαι μέγα : the strong voice 
of <Aeschines is often mentioned by 
Demosthenes; see below, 88 280, 2855, 
291°, 3137, and especially ΧΙΧ. 206—208, 
216, 337—340; in XIX. 216 he says, μηδέ 
γε εἰ καλὸν καὶ μέγα οὗτος φθέγξεται, μηδ᾽ 
εἰ φαῦλον ἐγώ, alluding to his own weak- 
ness of voice. See Dissen’s notes on the 
whole of this section. 

8 260. 1. ἐν δὲ ταῖς ἡμέραις implies 
that the ceremonies just described were 
performed by night.—@dcovs, used espe- 
cially of Bacchanals ; see Eur. Bacch. 680, 
ὁρῶ δὲ θιάσους τρεῖς γυναικείων χορῶν. 

2. τῷ μαράθῳ καὶ τῇ λεύκῃ: see 
Photius, ταῦτα φυτὰ μυστικά ἐστι" καὶ 
ἡ μὲν μάραθος ἀγωγός ἐστιν ὄφεων, καὶ 
ἐπ᾽ αὐτῆς τὸ γῆρας (their old hides) ἀπο- 
δύονται" ἡ δὲ λεύκη ὅτι Ἡρακλῆς ἀνελθὼν 
ἐστέψατο τούτῳ. Harpocr. (under λεύκη), 
after quoting this passage, says, οἱ τὰ 
Βακχικὰ τελούμενοι TH λεύκῃ στέφονται 
τῷ χθόνιον μὲν εἶναι τὸ φυτὸν, χθόνιον 
δὲ καὶ τὸν τῆς Περσεφόνης Διόνυσον. τὴν 
δὲ λεύκην πεφυκέναι φασὶ πρὸς τῷ ᾿Αχέ- 
 povtt, ὅθεν καὶ ἀχερωίδα καλεῖσθαι παρ᾽ 

Ὁμήρῳ" “ἤριπε δ᾽ ὡς ὅτε τις δρῦς ἤριπεν 

ἢ ἀχερωίς᾽ (1]. X111. 389). (For Dionysus, 


’ 


τς Persephone’s son, the Orphic Zagreus, 


see Gerhard, Mythol. §§ 419, 429, 438.) 
From μάραθον, fennel, Marathon is said 
to have been named (cf. Strab. p. 160): 
for the fondness of serpents for it, see 


(See Vomel.) 
ἅττις drris vis L; bys ἄττης [ἄττης] ὕης Strab. p. 471. 5. 


ὑης άττης αττὴς uns D; ὑῆς ΒΙ.; vis 
κιττοφόρος all MSS. 


Ael. Hist. Animal. rx. 16. For serpents 
in the Bacchic worship, see Eur. Bacch. 
102, 697. The white poplar, “λεύκη; 
populus alba, is mentioned in Ar. Nub. 
1007. See Bekk. Anecd. p. 279: 7 δὲ 
λεύκη TO μὲν τών φύλλων ἔχει λευκὸν τὸ δ᾽ 
ἕτερον μέλαν, σύμβολόν τι τοῦ βίου καὶ 
τοῦ θανάτου. 

3. τοὺς παρείας : see Harpocr., παρεῖαι 
ὀνομάζονταί τινες ὄφεις παρὰ τὸ παρείας 
μείζους ἔχειν, and Ael. Hist. An. VIII. 12, 
ὁ παρείας ἢ mapovas πυρρὸς THY χρόαν, 
εὐωπὸς τὸ ὄμμα, πλατὺς τὸ στόμα, δακεῖν 
οὐ σφαλερὸς ἀλλὰ πρᾷος. ἔνθεν τοι καὶ τῷ 
θεῶν φιλανθρωποτάτῳ ἱερὸν ἀνῆκαν αὐτὸν, 
καὶ ἐπεφήμισαν ᾿Ασκληπιοῦ θεράποντα εἶναι 
οἱ πρῶτοι ταῦτα ἀνιχνεύσαντες. These 
harmless snakes were thus sacred to 
Aesculapius, and were named παρεῖαι 
from their fat cheeks. 

4. vot σαβοῖ: as εὐοῖ, evoe, was 
the cry used in the regular Bacchic 
worship, so σαβοῖ was used in invoking 
Σαβάζιος, the Phrygian Bacchus. All 
points to some Asiatic worship, more or 
less caricatured.—vns ἄττης ἄττης ὑῆς: 
these mystic words stand as a cognate ac- 
cusative with ἐπορχούμενος ; this is what 
he danced. See Lobeck, Aglaophamus, 
pp. 652, 1041—46, who quotes Bekk. 
Anecd. p. 207: ἄτης bns* τὸ μὲν Uns 
vids, τὸ δὲ ἄτης θεὸς Σαβάζιος. ἄλλοι δὲ 
ὕην τὸν Διόνυσον. 

5. ἔξαρχος καὶ προηγεμὼν designates 
Aeschines as /eader of the song or dance 
or both: cf. Eur. Bacch. 141, ὁ δ᾽ ἔξαρχος 


261 


184 


la lal Ν, : 7 
τοιαῦθ᾽ ὑπὸ τῶν γρᾳδίων προσαγορευόμενος, μισθὸν λαμ- 314 


ΔΗΛΛΟΣΘΕΝΟΥΣ 


/ , » Ν \ Ν ’ ΕΝ ἃ e 
βάνων τούτων ἔνθρυπτα καὶ στρεπτοὺς Kai νεήλατα, ep οἷς 
τίς οὐκ ἂν ὡς ἀληθῶς αὑτὸν εὐδαιμονίσειε καὶ τὴν αὑτοῦ 

, 5 νῷ 3 Ν ὃ ΄ 3 , ε ὃ / 
τύχην; ἐπειδὴ δ᾽ εἰς τοὺς δημότας ἐνεγράφης ὁπωσδήποτε 

2A \ A > ὃ / be) / Wi / Ν (λλ 
(ἐῶ γὰρ τοῦτο)--- ἐπειδή γ᾽ ἐνεγράφης, εὐθέως τὸ κάλλιστον 

ἴω A “~ 5 
ἐξελέξω τῶν ἔργων, γραμματεύειν καὶ ὑπηρετεῖν TOLS ἄρχι- 


6. τοιαῦτα Σ, L; τὰ τοιαῦτα vulg. 


“γραϊδίων =; γρᾳδίων L. 8. 


ris 2. 


avrov (w. both’ and‘) 2; αὐτὸν L; αὐτὸν vulg.; ““εὐδαιμονήσειεν αὐτὸν ἢ pr. Laur. S, 


nunc ἀντοὺ ᾿" (Vomel). 

8 261. 2. τοῦτό ye Al. 
Az; ἐπ. γ᾽ ἐνεγράφης om. Al. 
L7;-vulg. 
ἀρχαίοις A2. 


ai 
ἀρχιδίοις Σ, L, vulg.; ἀρχείοις Σ 


αὐτοῦ (w.’ and‘) Σ; αὐτοῦ L, vulg. 
ἐπειδή γ᾽ Σ, L}, vulg.; ἐπειδὴ δ᾽ Ο; ἐπειδὴ δ᾽ οὖν 


γραμματεύειν Σ, L, Α΄, Φ; ὑπογραμμ. 


Βρόμιος, εὐοῖ.--- κυττοφόρος, zvy-dearer, the - 


ivy being sacred to Bacchus. For the 
reading κιστοφόρος (against all Mss.) see 
Vomel’s note. See Harpocr. under κιτ- 
Topopos: ἔνιοι μετὰ TOU σ᾽ γράφουσι 
κιστοφόρος" τὰς γὰρ λεγομένας κίστας 
ἱερὰς εἶναι ἔλεγεν τοῦ Διονύσου καὶ ταῖν 
θεαῖν.---λικνοφόρος, bearer of the win- 
nowing-fan, λίκνον, the mystica vannus 
Taccht. See Verg. Georg. 1. 166, and 
Varro quoted by Servius on the passage : 
ideo ait quod Liberi patris sacra ad 
purgationem animae pertinebant; et sic 
homines eius mysteriis purgabantur sicut 
vannis frumenta purgantur.—kal τοιαῦ- 
τα, i.e. these (ἔξαρχος κ.τ.λ.) and similar 
nantes. 

7. ἔνθρυπτα, στρεπτοὺς, sops, cwists : 
for ἔνθρυπτα see the Schol., ψωμοὶ οἴνῳ 
BeBpeyuévor; στρεπτούς, πλακοῦντος εἶδος 
(Harpocr.), evidently from στρέφω.-- 
νεήλατα : κατ᾽ ἔλλειψιν ἀντὶ τοῦ νεήλατα 
ἄλφιτα, τὰ νεωστὶ ἀληλεσμένα, ἃ δὴ μέλιτι 
ἀναδεύοντες, ἀσταφίδας τε καὶ χλωροὺς 


᾿ἐρεβίνθους ἐπεμβάλλοντες, τοῖς τὰ ἱερὰ 


τελοῦσιν ἔνεμον (Harpocr.), i.e. barley 
buns, made of newly-ground (roasted) 
barley, soaked in honey and covered 
with plums and chick-peas. But Blass 
is right in connecting νε-ήλατα not with 
ἀλέω but with ἐλαύνω : cf. ἐλατήρ, a flat 
cake (Ar. Ach. 246, Eq. 1182); acc. to 
Suidas, παρὰ τὸ ταῖς χερσὶν ἐλαύνεσθαι εἰς 
πλάτος. See Bl. and West. on this section. 

§ 261. τ. εἰς τοὺς δημότας ἐνεγράφης: 


each deme was responsible for the correct- 
ness of its ληξιαρχικὸν γραμματεῖον, or list 
of citizens. Aristotle’s Constitution of 
Athens now gives us clear information 
on the whole subject of the enrolment 
of new citizens. See 427: μετέχουσιν 
μὲν τῆς πολιτείας οἱ ἐξ ἀμφοτέρων γεγο- 
νότες ἀστῶν. ἐγγράφονται δ᾽ εἰς τοὺς 
δημότας ὀκτωκαίδεκα ἔτη γεγονότες" ὅταν 
δ᾽ ἐγγράφωνται, διαψηφίζονται περὶ αὐτῶν 


ὀμόσαντες οἱ δημόται, πρῶτον μὲν εἰ δο- — 


κοῦσι γεγονέναι τὴν ἡλικίαν τὴν ἐκ τοῦ 
νόμου, ....δεύτερον δ᾽ εἰ ἐλεύθερός ἐστι καὶ 
γέγονε κατὰ τοὺς νόμους.... μετὰ δὲ ταῦτα 
δοκιμάζει τοὺς ἐγγραφέντας ἡ βουλή.... 
φρουροῦσι δὲ τὰ δύο ἔτη (previously de- 
scribed), χλαμύδας ἔχοντες, καὶ ἀτελεῖς 
εἰσι πάντων....διεξελθόντων δὲ τῶν δυεῖν 
ἐτῶν, ἤδη μετὰ τῶν ἄλλων εἰσίν. (See 
the whole ομαρίει.)---ὁπωσδήποτε, some- 
how, with ἐπειδή γ᾽ ἐνεγράφης, refers to 
the story that his father was a slave, in 
which case it would have been impossible 
for the son to be legally enrolled as a 
citizen without an affirmative vote of 
6000 in the Assembly; while the safe- 
guards against illegal enrolment (see 
Aristotle, above) would have made this 
almost impossible. 

3. γραμματεύειν : see $§ 162°, 209). 
The occupation of a paid private clerk 
(not that of a clerk of the Senate or 
Assembly) was despised at Athens: see 
§ 1273, ὄλεθρος γραμματεύς.---ἀρχιδίοις, 


petty officers: ἀρχίδιον is here diminutive — 


(yp), Φ (vp), Υ, At, B (yp); 


vem” 3 3 a 
F 


ΠΕΡῚ TOY ΣΤΕΦΑΝΟῪΥ 185 


/ e ἜΝ ᾽ὔ ~ \ / / > ἃ a A 
| δίοις. ὡς δ᾽ ἀπηλλάγης ποτὲ Kal τούτου, πάνθ᾽ ἃ τῶν ἄλλων 
κατηγορεῖς αὐτὸς ποιήσας, οὐ κατήσχυνας μὰ Δί οὐδὲν τῶν 5 
se / “ Ν “~ / > οἷ ’ὔ Ν 

TPOVTNPYMEVAV τῳ μετὰ TAVTA βίῳ, ἀλλὰ μισθώσας σαυτὸν 262 
τοῖς βαρυστόνοις ἐπικαλουμένοις ἐκείνοις ὑποκριταῖς, Σιμύκκᾳ 
καὶ Σωκράτει, ἐτριταγωνίστεις, σῦκα καὶ βότρυς καὶ ἐλάας 
συλλέγων ὥσπερ ὀπωρώνης ἐκ τῶν ἀλλοτρίων χωρίων, 
πλείω λαμβάνων ἀπὸ τούτων ἢ τῶν ἀγώνων, OVS ὑμεῖς περὶ 5 
τῆς ψυχῆς ἠγωνίζεσθε: ἢν γὰρ ἄσπονδος καὶ ἀκήρυκτος 
A gaa Ν Ν Ν / Cons re Ν a 9 
ὑμῖν πρὸς τοὺς θεατὰς πόλεμος, ὑφ᾽ ὧν πολλὰ τραύματ 


4. πάντα (for πάνθ᾽ ἃ) At. 5. κατηγόρεις At. κατήσχυνας Σ. 
6. ὑπηργμένων Y; προυπηγμένων O; προὑπηργμένων Σ. 
| 8 262. 1. μισθώσας ἁυτὸν 2, V6. 2. ἐκείνοις ἐπικαλ. AI; ἐκείνοις καλου- 


μένοις V6; ἐπικαλ. ἐκείν. vulg. Σιμύκκαι Σ, Φ; Σιμμύκκ (a above) L; Σιμίκκα ΟἹ, Bi 
(Σιμμύκαν τὸν ὑποκριτήν, Athen. VIII. p. 348 A); Σιμύλῳ Σ (yp), At. 2, vulg.; 
ἐλάας 2, Ar; ἐλαίας vulg. 4. ὀπωρώνης ἐκεῖνος A2. 


ΤῈ Σιωύδων. 3. 


τούτων τραύματα L, vulg.; τραύματα om. 2. op 


- 


5 
ἐξ ὧν B (mg.). τὰ πολλὰ Ο. 


of ἀρχή in the sense of ἄρχων. See 
Aesch. III. 21, ἀρχὴν ὑπεύθυνον μὴ ἀπο- 
δημεῖν. 

6. τῶν προὔπηργμένων, of your ante- 
cedents. 

ὃ 262. 2. τοῖς βαρυστόνοις, the 
heavy groaners.—Xuy.ixkg (so Σ): Theo- 


_ phrastus (Athen. VIII. 348 A) mentions 


Σιμμύκαν τὸν ὑποκριτήν (perhaps the same 
man), to whom Stratonicus the harper 
applied the proverb μέγας οὐδεὶς campos 
ἰχθύς, dividing the words μέγας, οὐδεὶς, 
campos, ἰχθύς (ἰχθὺς δὲ διὰ τὴν ἀφωνίαν). 
3. ἐτριταγωνίστεις : a company of 


_ strolling actors, such as performed at the 


country festivals, was probably composed 
of two men, who played the first and 
second parts and hired another to play the 
third parts. The description which follows 
(σῦκα «.7.X.) can hardly apply to the 
μικρὰ Διονύσια, τὰ ἐν ἀγροῖς, which came 


in winter (see Β].).---σοῦκα.. χωρίων : the 


meaning of these much disputed words 
seems to be, that the band of players sub- 
sisted chiefly on the fruit which Aeschines, 
as their hired servant, collected from the 


- neighbouring farms by begging, stealing, 


or buying, as he found most convenient. 
He is compared to a small fruiterer 
(ὀπωρώνης), who each morning collects 


πρὸς Σ, L; ὁ πρὸς vulg. 


his load οἵ fruit from farms which he 
has hired, or wherever else he can get 
it cheapest. Pollux (vi. 128) includes 
ὀπωρώνης (with πορνοβοσκός and ἀλλαντο- 
πώληΞ) in his long list οὗ βίοι ἐφ᾽ οἷς ἄν 
τις ὀνειδισθείη. See [Dem.] LIII. 21. 

5. πλείω... ἀγώνων, setting more (profit) 
Srom these than from your plays (contests). 
—ois (cogn. acc.)...qyovlleo Oe, which you 
played at the risk of your léves (or in which 
you fought for your lives), with a pun on 
the two meanings of ἀγών and ἀγωνίζομαι, 
Jight and play: see lV. 47 τῶν στρατηγῶν 
ἕκαστος δὶς καὶ τρὶς κρίνεται παρ᾽ ὑμῖν περὶ 
θανάτου, πρὸς δὲ τοὺς ἐχθροὺς οὐδεὶς οὐδὲ 
ἅπαξ αὐτῶν ἀγωνίσασθαι περὶ θανάτου 
τολμᾷ, where there is a similar pun on 
being tried for their lives in court and in 
battle. 

6. ἄσπονδος kal ἀκήρυκτος, zithout 
truce or herald, i.e. implacable, without 
even the common decencies of civilized 
warfare. See Thuc. 1. 146, rap’ ἀλλήλους 
ἐφοίτων ἀκηρύκτως μὲν ἀνυπόπτως δὲ οὔ 
(before the actual war), and 11. 1, οὔτε 
ἐπεμίγνυντο ἔτι ἀκηρυκτεί (after the war 
began): here heradds are a sign of actual 
warfare. 

7. Tpavpar εἰληφὼς: see XIX. 337, ὅτε 
μὲν τὰ Θυέστου καὶ τῶν ἐπὶ Tpola κακὰ ἠγω- 


186 AHMOZOENOY2 


> \ ον \ 3 , A ΄, Sip 
εἰληφὼς εἰκότως τοὺς ἀπείρους τῶν τοιούτων κινούνων WS 

a , ᾽ 

268 δειλοὺς σκώπτεις. ἀλλὰ γὰρ παρεὶς ὧν τὴν πενίαν αἰτιάσαιυτ 
ἴω ω 4 

dv τις, πρὸς αὐτὰ τὰ τοῦ τρόπου σου βαδιοῦμαι KaTHYOPT- 

ο ‘a A 3 

ματα. τοιαύτην yap εἵλου πολιτείαν, ἐπειδή ποτε καὶ TOUT 
ἐπῆλθέ σοι ποιῆσαι, δι’ ἣν εὐτυχούσης μὲν τῆς πατρίδος 

ἣν / » Ν Ἂς / Ν re” , 

saya βίον ἔζης δεδιὼς καὶ τρέμων καὶ ἀεὶ πληγήσεσθαι 

ἴω «a ΄“ ἴω “' 3 

προσδοκῶν ἐφ᾽ οἷς σαυτᾷ συνήδεις ἀδικοῦντι, ἐν οἷς ὃ 

Sup εν \ ΣῪ δ 13 εὖτ 5 , 

264 ἡτύχησαν οἱ ἄλλοι, θρασὺς ὧν ὑφ᾽ ἁπάντων wal. καίτοι 
ὅστις χιλίων πολιτῶν ἀποθανόντων ἐθάρρησε, τί οὗτος 


x 


8. κινδύνων om. AT. 


§ 263. 1. dy, L, ΟἹ, Ar, ΕἸ, &; ἐξ ὧν vulg. τὴν om. O. 2. προσ- 
wou (for τρόπου cou) A2. 3. τούτων (for τοῦτ᾽) A2. ἦλθέ σοι VO. 
5. λαγὼ Σ, vulg.; λαγῶ L; λαγῶν Ar (ν erased). éfeis VO. 6. ἀδικων 
(τι above, w ch. to ov) L. 7. ὑπὸ πάντων ΑΙ. 

8 264. 2. ἐθάρσησε Al. 

a 
vitero, ἐξεβάλλετε αὐτὸν καὶ ἐξεσυρίττετε 8 268. 3. καὶ emphasizes the rest of 


ἐκ τῶν θεάτρων, καὶ μόνον οὐ KaTENEVETE 
οὕτως ὥστε τελευτῶντα τοῦ τριταγωνιστεῖν 
ἀποστῆναι. This account of the πόλεμος 
makes τραύματ᾽ here perfectly intelligible; 
but the reading πλείω...τραύματα in 5 
(which all Mss. except = have) makes 
endless difficulty and confusion. If τραύ- 
ματα in 5 is referred to wounds received 
in stealing fruit, compared with those 
received on the stage or after the play, 
there is a strange repetition of the latter ; 
if there is a reference (as Westermann 
suggests) to fruit used in pelting the actors, 
it is hard to see how figs, grapes, and 
olives could endanger the lives of the 
‘‘heavy groaners.”’ 

8. ὡς δειλοὺς σκώπτεις: see ὃ 2457 
and note. 

Demosthenes (XIX. 246, 247) says that 
Aeschines was a τριταγωνιστής also to 
actors of high repute, as Theodorus and 
Aristodemus; and he reminds him of the 
time when he used to play the part of 
Creon in the Antigone with these actors. 
He adds the following: ἐν ἅπασι τοῖς 
δράμασι τοῖς τραγικοῖς ἐξαίρετόν ἐστιν ὥσπερ 
γέρας τοῖς τριταγωνισταῖς τὸ τοὺς τυράννους 
καὶ τοὺς τὰ σκῆπτρ᾽ ἔχοντας εἰσιέναι. This 
is mentioned to explain why so important 
a part was given to Aeschines. 


the clause, τοῦτ᾽... ποιῆσαι, i.e. when at 
last you took it into your head to try 
this. . 

5. λαγὼ βίον ἔζης: cf. Dion. Chrys. 


LXVI. p. 357 R. Weil quotes Trag. frag. | 


incert. 373 (N.), λαγὼ βίον ζῇς, ὁ πρὶν 
ἄτρομος λέων. ‘*Dicuntur leports vitam 
vivere qui semper anxii trepidique vivunt ; 
nam ut est apud Herod. III. 108, ὁ λάγος 
ὑπὸ παντὸς θηρεύεται θηρίου καὶ ὄρνιθος καὶ 
ἀνθρώπου, ac ne somnum quidem capit 
nisi oculis apertis ” (Dissen). te 

7. θρασὺς ὧν.. ὦψαι (M. T. 884): 
personal passive construction. Cf. §§ 282, 
284, 286. 

8 264. 1. χιλίων ἀποθανόντων : see 
Diod. xvi. 86, τῶν δ᾽ ᾿Αθηναίων ἔπεσον 
μὲν ἐν τῇ μάχῃ πλείους τῶν χιλίων, ἥλωσαν 
δὲ οὐκ ἐλάττους τῶν δισχιλίων. See Ly- 
curg. Leocr. 142, χίλιοι τῶν ὑμετέρων 
πολιτῶν ἐν Χαιρωνείᾳ ἐτελεύτησαν, καὶ 
δημοσίᾳ αὐτοὺς ἡ πόλις ἔθαψαν. Diod. 
XVI. 88 quotes an eloquent passage of the 
speech of Lycurgus at the trial of Lysicles, 
one of the Athenian commanders at 
Chaeroneéa, who was condemned to death: 
ἐστρατήγεις, ὦ Λύσικλες, Kal χιλίων μὲν 
πολιτῶν τετελευτηκότων δισχιλίων δ᾽ αἰχ- 
μαλώτων γεγονότων, τροπαίου δὲ κατὰ τῆς 
πόλεως ἑστηκότος, τῆς δ᾽ Ἑλλάδος ἁπάσης 


ΠΕΡΙ 


δ στα, ἐγὼ δ᾽ ἐφοίτων. 


4. παραλείπω Ar. 
8 265. 1. 
" πράως) καὶ =?, L, vulg. 3. 


δουλευούσης, Kal τούτων ἁπάντων γεγενη- 
ἐνων σοῦ ἡγουμένου καὶ στρατηγοῦντος, 
τολμᾷς ζῆν καὶ τὸ τοῦ ἡλίου φῶ: ὁρᾶν; 

5. προσόντ᾽ αἰσχρὰ τούτῳ : οἵ. ὃ 276 

ὐ Χερῶς λέγειν, Zo be ready to tell: ᾿ 


A νὰ 265. In §§ 265, 266 the orator sums 
up vigorously the substance of 88 257— 
_ Westermann points out that each 
εἰ five stages of the life of Aeschines 
mentioned in order, when he was 
( ) a schoolmaster’s assistant ($ 258), 
(2) initiator ($§ 259, 260), (3) scribe (8 261), 
(4) actor ($262), (5) politician ($§ 263, 264). 
he words commonly read in 1. 4, éxdpeves, 
δ᾽ ἐχορήγουν, correspond to nothing 
precedes, and are rightly omitted on 
authority. Many ancient rhetoricians 
e these famous antitheses with ap- 
‘al and admiration; but Demetrius 
ὶ ἑρμην. 250, p. 105 W.) disapproves of 
n on rhetorical grounds, saying Κακοτε- 
wre yap ἔοικε διὰ τὴν ἀνταπόδοσιν, 
λον δὲ παίζοντι, οὐκ ἀγανακτοῦντι. 
are again shocked by the open avowal 
disgrace of earning an honest living; 
Mucients were certainly more moe 


TOY STEbANOY 


τ ἢ μὴ ; 4 jn ᾿ 
“παθεῖν ὑπὸ τῶν ζώντων δίκαιός ἐστιν; 


ἐτέλεις, ἐγὼ δ᾽ ἐτελούμην. 
᾿μάτευες, ἐγὼ δ᾽ ἠκκλησίαζον. 
ἐθεώρουν: ἐξέπιπτες, ἐγὼ δ᾽ ἐσύριττον. 
πεπολίτευσαι πάντα, ἐγὼ δ᾽ ὑπὲρ τῆς πατρίδος. 


187 


πολλὰ τοίνυν ἕτερ᾽ 


εἶτ᾽ ἐρώτησον τουτουσὶ τὴν 
ΡῚ ra ’ 
ἐδίδασκες γράμ- 
3 
Dd es eae 
> ΄, ΞΌΨΘΝ δ᾽ 
ἐτριταγωνίστεις, ἐγὼ 
ὑπὲρ τῶν ἐχθρῶν 


ἐῷ τάλλα, 


᾿ ᾿ἀλλὰ νυνὶ τήμερον ἐγὼ μὲν ὑπὲρ τοῦ στεφανωθῆναι δοκιμά- 


ὅσ᾽ ἀναδείξαιμι Φ. 

καιμοὶ Σ: καμοὶ or καμοὶ 1, Ar. 2. πράως Σ'; πράως 
ποτέρου Σ', L, Ar; ὁποτέρου = (corr.), vulg. 
4. ἐχόρευες, ἐγὼ δ᾽ ἐχορήγουν. (after ἐτελούμην) vulg., om. Σ, L}. 


(or 


I. Ta...BeBrwpéva: passive of d...Be- 
βιώκαμεν (cf. ὃ 1307). 

2. πράως: Spengel quotes Rhet. ad 
Alex. 38, δεῖ δὲ πικρῷ τῷ ἤθει μὴ ἐξετάζειν 
ἀλλὰ πραεῖ" τοῦτον γὰρ τὸν τρόπον οἱ 
λόγοι γιγνόμενοι πιθανώτεροι φανήσονται 
τοῖς ἀκούουσιν, οἱ δὲ λέγοντες αὐτοὺς ἥκιστα 
διαβαλοῦσιν, as referring to this passage, 
and urges on this ground the omission of 
ἐξέπιπτες, ἔγὼ δ᾽ ἐσύριττον. (See Spengel, 
Preface to Rhet. Gr. II. p. xviii.) Blass, 
however, doubts the reference, and ex- 
plains πράως as a sarcastic allusion to the 
bitterness of Aeschines. We could wish 
for some sufficient reason for discrediting 
the words in question, chiefly out of regard 
for Demosthenes. 

4. ἐφοίτων, went to school: cf. Ar. 
Nub. 916, διὰ σὲ δὲ φοιτᾶν οὐδεὶς ἐθέλει 
τῶν μειρακίων .---ἐτελούμην, probably into 
the Eleusinian mysteries. 

6. ἐξέπιπτες: ἐκπίπτειν, exig?, is used 
as a passive to ἐκβάλλειν ; cf. XIX. 337, 
ἐξεβάλλετε αὐτὸν καὶ ἐξεσυρίττετε ἐκ τῶν 
θεάτρων. See Arist. Poet. 17?, 1815. 

§ 266. 2. ὑπὲρ... δοκιμάζομαι: δο- 
κιμασία is any investigation to test the 
fitness or competency of a person for any- 
thing, as for office (its ordinary meaning) 


5 εἰπεῖν ἔχων περὶ αὐτοῦ παραλείψω: οὐ yap ὅσ᾽ ἂν δείξαιμι. 
'προσόντ᾽ αἰσχρὰ τούτῳ καὶ ὀνείδη, πάντ᾽ οἶμαι δεῖν εὐχερῶς 5 
λέγειν, ἀλλ᾽ ὅσα μηδὲν αἰσχρόν ἐστιν εἰπεῖν ἐμοί. 
᾿Εξέτασον τοίνυν παρ᾽ ἄλληλα τὰ σοὶ κἀμοὶ βεβιωμένα, 265 
πράως, μὴ πικρῶς, Αἰσχίνη" 
"ποτέρου τύχην ἂν ἕλοιθ᾽ ἕκαστος αὐτῶν. 


266 


188 AHMOZOENOY2 


Ν \ > ε A 3 A 3 ΄ ‘ δὲ 

ζομαι, τὸ δὲ μηδ᾽ ὁτιοῦν ἀδικεῖν ἀνωμολόγημαι, σοὶ ὃὲ 
> an ¥ ἴω 

συκοφάντῃ μὲν εἶναι δοκεῖν ὑπάρχει, κινδυνεύεις δὲ εἴτε δεῖ 
>» na al pee A a) Ν / Ν 

ς σ᾽ ἔτι τοῦτο ποιεῖν, εἴτ᾽ ἤδη πεπαῦσθαι μὴ μεταλαβόντα τὸ 


ὩΣ ει ee ee δέν τοὺ} eee eee 


/ , ἴω Ψ 
πέμπτον μέρος τῶν ψήφων. 


ἀγαθῇ γ᾽ --οὐχ ὁρᾷς ;---τύχῃ 


συμβεβιωκὼς τῆς ἐμῆς κατηγορεῖς. 
Φέρε δὴ καὶ τὰς τῶν λῃτουργιῶν μαρτυρίας ὧν λελῃτούρ- 


γηκα ὑμῖν ἀναγνῶ. παρ᾽ ἃς παρανάγνωθι καὶ σύ μοι τὰς 


¢ Ὁ, aA 3 , 
ῥήσεις as ἐλυμαίνου, 


¢/ nr nr \ / VA 
ἥκω νεκρῶν κευθμῶνα καὶ σκότου πῦλας, 


ἐμῆς Σ, 1.1; ἐμῆς ὡς φαύλης vulg. 


8 267. 1. λειτουργῶν (« over γῶ) Σ. 


ἀναγνῶ πάσας vulg. 
B; παρανάγ. δ᾽ ἡμῖν vulg. 


5 καὶ 
a \ ” \ , Δ 
κακαγγελεῖν μὲν ἴσθι μὴ θέλοντά με, 
8 266. 3. σὺ (for σοὶ) Νό. 4. εἴτ᾽ ἔτι δεῖ σε τοῦτο Y, Az. 5. 7d 
πέμπτον μέρος MSS. ; πέμπτον om. Dind. (cf. ὃ 103”). 6.. ἀγαθὴ y’ 2, Ar. 23 
ay. & L, vulg. 7. συμβεβηκὼς Σ (ἡ ch’gd to ὦ or w), A2; συμβεβιωκὼς ΟἹ. 


2. ἀναγνῶ, wap’ ἃς Σ, Li, Φ; 


παρανάγνωθι Σ, L, F; παρανάγ. δὴ O (ἡμῖν in mg.), At, ae 
μοι om. vulg. 3. ἐλυμήνω At, -dvw A2. 


4. νεκρῶν (AIII over exp) 2; ἥκω λιπὼν L, vulg.; λοιπὸν V6. 6. κακαγγελεῖν 
B, Y; κακ᾽ ἀγγέλλειν Σ, Ar (corr.); κακαγγέλλειν L, Φ, Ar}, V6; κάκ᾽ ἀγγελεῖν vulg. 


a ρ““ἑἑ«“«“ ---ΠΠπ΄΄᾿ 


or for citizenship; and δοκιμάζομαι here 
implies that this trial is to test his fitness 
for the crown. 

3. τὸ... ἀδικεῖν ἀνωμολόγημαι : cf. 
8 862, ἀνωμολόγημαι τὰ ἄριστα πράττειν. 
The articular infinitive in 07. od/. is rare 
(M. T. 794, 743).---σοὶ ὑπάρχει, 12 75 772 
store for you. 

4. κινδυνεύεις corresponds to δοκιμά ζο- 
μαι (2): the meaning is, the guestion with 
you ts. 

5. τοῦτο ποιεῖν, i.e. 20 go on being a 
συκοφάντης.--- πεπαῦσθαι, 710 be stopped 
(once for all), i.e. by ἀτιμία (cf. 8 82°).— 
τὸ πέμπτον μέρος : Dindorf omits πέμπτον 
because it is omitted in 88 103, 222, 250, 
whereas it appears in other speeches fre- 
quently (e.g. XXII. 3). What modern 
orator or writer would submit to such 
rules of consistency as critics impose on 
the ancients ? 

6. ob x dpas; cf. 232°, 281°. 

§ 267. 1. φέρε... ἀναγνώ (M. T. 
257): the orator does not read the tes- 
timony himself; cf. λέγε (9). So φέρε... 


εἴπω, ΧΙΧ. 169, followed by λέγε.---λῃ- 
τουργιῶν : this includes the public services 
mentioned in χορηγεῖν and τριηραρχεῖν in 
§ 2574, but not εἰσφέρειν, as the property 
tax was not a λῃτουργία. 

3. ἐλυμαίνου, zwsed to outrage: cf. ἐπέ- 
τριψας, ὃ 180%. 

4. ἥκω... πύλας : the Hecuba of Euri- 
pides begins, 


ἥκω νεκρῶν κευθμῶνα καὶ σκότου πύλας 
λιπὼν, ἵν᾽ “Αιδης χωρὶς ᾧκισται θεῶν, 
Πολύδωρος, ᾿Εκάβης παῖς. 


All Mss. except 2 have λιπών for νεκρῶν, 
making the sense of the quotation com- 
plete. But such a change is unlikely in 
so familiar a verse. 

6. κακαγγελεῖν...με: this verse is other- 
wise unknown: κακαγγελεῖν must be pres. 
infin. of κακαγγελέω (otherwise unknown), 
depending on θέλοντα. The readings of 
the best MSS., κακαγγέλλειν or κάκ᾽ ἀγγέλ- 
hew (2), are plainly impossible. Weil 
refers to Eur. Tro. 705, οὐχ ἑκὼν yap 
ἀγγελῶ κ.τ.λ. 


tt ge | 
iw — Ν 


ΠΕΡΙ 


 γωνιστήν. 


Ψ ἮΝ , "50 7 
οὔτε τῶν τοιούτων οὐδέν. 


7. ἔπειτα δὲ vulg.; δὲ om. Σ, L, ΑΙ. 
πολίτην Σ', L, F, ®; καὶ om. vulg. 
2, L, ®, BL, Ar. 


TOY =TE®ANOY 


189 


πον, Ν a Ψ \ ε ἊΨ, > δ᾿ 
καὶ κακὸν κακῶς σε μάλιστα μὲν ot θεοὶ ἔπειθ᾽ οὗτοι 
’ὔ 
πάντες ἀπολέσειαν, πονηρὸν ὄντα καὶ πολίτην καὶ τριτα- 
Ν 4 
λέγε τὰς μαρτυρίας. 


MAPTTPIAT. 


Ἔν μὲν τοίνυν τοῖς πρὸς τὴν πόλιν τοιοῦτος" ἐν δὲ τοῖς 268 = 
16 ἰδίοις εἰ μὴ πάντες ἴστε ὅτι κοινὸς καὶ φιλάνθρωπος καὶ τοῖς 
δεομένοις ἐπαρκῶν, σιωπῶ καὶ οὐδὲν ἂν εἴποιμι οὐδὲ παρα- 
/ 
σχοίμην περὶ τούτων οὐδεμίαν μαρτυρίαν, OUT εἴ τινας ἐκ 
“ / 3 , = ek) ΓΑΙ ὦ / / 
TOV πολεμίων ἐλυσάμην, OUT εἴ τισι θυγατέρας συνεξέδωκα, 5 
N \ ν ε / 
καὶ γὰρ οὕτω πως ὑπείληφα. 269 
SN ΄, ᾿ \ S ΄, Ἂ A , \ 
ἐγὼ νομίζω τὸν μὲν εὖ παθόντα δεῖν μεμνῆσθαι πάντα τὸν 
, Ν \ , es hee A 3 ΔΕ ΠΝ; \ 
χρόνον, Tov δὲ ποιήσαντ᾽ εὐθὺς ἐπιλελῆσθαι, εἰ Set τὸν μὲν 


ν᾿ 


ὃ. πάντες ἀπολέσειαν οὗτοι At. καὶ 
καὶ προδότην (after πολίτην) vulg.; om. 


§ 268. 3. mapacxolunv dv vulg.; ἂν om. Σ, L, B, F, Φ. 4. τινας 
om. Ol. 

v 8 269. 2. μὲν om. V6. πάντα τὸν χρόνον =, L, &, B, Ar. 2; τὸν πάντα xp. 
7 


σα ]ρ. 


ἡ. The words κακὸν κακῶς σε.. ἀπο- 
λέσειαν are probably an adaptation of a 
verse quoted from Lynceus by Athenaeus, 
ΠΝ. 150 C, κακὸν κακῶς σέ <7 > ἀπολέσειαν 
οἱ θεοί, or both may go back to the source 
of Ar. Eq. 2, 3, κακῶς Παφλάγονα.. .«ἀπο- 
λέσειαν οἱ θεοί. See Blass. 
8, πονηρὸν: with both πολίτην and 
᾿ τριταγωνιστήν. 
§ 268. 2. κοινὸς, in public relations, 
ed spirited, in private matters (as here), 
devoted, at the service of all: cf. Isoc. 1. 
‘To, τοῖς φίλοις κοινός. 
«3. οὐδὲν ἂν εἴποιμι, 7 had rather not 
mention anything. 
4. εἴ twas ἐλυσάμην : these were 
Athenians captured by Philip at Olynthus 
‘in 348 B.c., whom Demosthenes ransomed 
346, hei he was in Pella on the 
Second embassy (Hist. ὃ 40). See XIx. 
166—170. Dem. lent various sums to these 
isoners, which they paid for their ran- 
; when afterwards Philip set all the 
r prisoners free without ransom, he 
gave the first their debts to him (ἔδωκα 


3. τὸν δ᾽ εὖ ποιήσαντα Ar; εὖ om. &, L, vulg. ; 
αὐτὸν (after εὐθὺς) Y, B (yp), O (mg.); αὐτῶν (yp), 


εὖ above line B. 
F (yp), Az (after ἐπιλ.). 


δωρεὰν τὰ λύτρα), which otherwise they 
would have been strictly required by law 
to pay (XIX. 170). See [LIII.] 11, of νόμοι 
κελεύουσι TOU λυσαμένου EK τῶν πολεμίων 
εἷναι τὸν λυθέντα ἐὰν μὴ ἀποδιδῷ τὰ λύτρα: 
but this is hardly sufficient authority for the 
severity of the penalty, personal slavery. 
5. συνεξέδωκα, i.e. Ae/fed poor citizens 


_ to endow their daughters: giving a dowry 


was an important part of giving a daughter 
in marriage: see Meier and Schémann, 
pp. 513 ff. 

6. οὔτε.. οὐδέν, zor anything else of 
the kind. These words are rather loosely 
connected with the preceding clauses with 
οὔτε : in all three οὔτε repeats the negative 
of οὐδὲν ἂν εἴποιμι κ-τ.λ., SO that the con- 
struction here is οὔτε ἂν εἴποιμι τῶν τοιού- 
των οὐδέν. 

8 269. I. 
(7). 

2. ἐγὼ... «δεῖν : an iambic trimeter. 

3. ποιήσαντ᾽ : sc. εὖ.---ἐπιλελῆσθαι: 
cf. πεπαῦσθαι, ὃ 266°. 


ὑπείληφα: cf. ὑπείλημμαι 


——Eo le 


190 AHMOZOENOY2 


χρηστοῦ τὸν δὲ μὴ μικροψύχου ποιεῖν ἔργον ἀνθρώπου. 
ς τὸ δὲ τὰς ἰδίας εὐεργεσίας ὑπομιμνήσκειν καὶ λέγειν μικροῦ 
δεῖν ὅμοιόν ἐστι τῷ ὀνειδίζειν. 
οὐδὲν, οὐδὲ προαχθήσομαι, ἀλλ᾽ ὅπως ποθ᾽ ὑπείλημμαι περὶ 


τούτων, ἀρκεῖ μοι. 


Βούλομαι δὲ τῶν ἰδίων ἀπαλλαγεὶς ἔτι μικρὰ πρὸς ὑμᾶς 

εἰπεῖν περὶ τῶν κοινῶν. εἰ μὲν γὰρ ἔχεις, Αἰσχίνη, τῶν ὑπὸ 
A Ν ν > A 3 i Ψ > a ial , 

τοῦτον τὸν ἥλιον εἰπεῖν ἀνθρώπων ὅστις ἀθῷος τῆς Φιλίππου 

πρότερον καὶ νῦν τῆς ᾿Αλεξάνδρου δυναστείας γέγονεν, ἣ 
ἴω ε , xX la , »» ἴω \ 3 A 

5 τῶν Ἑλλήνων ἢ τῶν βαρβάρων, ἔστω, TvyXwpw τὴν ἐμην--- 

εἴτε τύχην εἴτε δυστυχίαν ὀνομάζειν βούλει---πάντων γεγενῆ- 


4. μικροψύχρου (ρ erased) Σ. τὰ 
8 270. 2. ἐρεῖν A2. 1: ToUTOY 


vulg.; coc om. 2, Li, Ar. 6. πάντων 


4. μικροψύχου: see note on ὃ 270. 

5. ὑπομιμνήσκειν, ie. to be always 
calling to mind.—piKpod δεῖν, the full 
form of μικροῦ, almost (M. T. 779): cf. 
§ 151°. West. quotes Cic. Lael. xx. 71, 
odiosum sane genus hominum officia ex- 
probrantium; quae meminisse debet is in 
quem collata sunt, non commemorare qui 
contulit; and Sen. Benef. 11. 10, haec 
enim beneficii inter duos lex est: alter 
statim oblivisci debet dati, alter accepti 
nunquam; lacerat animum et premit fre- 
quens meritorum commemoratio. Pericles 
(Thuc. 11. 40) looks at the matter from a 
different point of view: οὐ yap πάσχοντες 
εὖ ἀλλὰ δρῶντες κτώμεθα τοὺς φίλους " 
κιτιλ. See the opposite view of Aris-. 
totle’s strange μεγαλόψυχος (Eth. Iv. 3, 
25); δοκοῦσι δὲ καὶ μνημονεύειν ods ἂν 
ποιήσωσιν εὖ, ὧν δ᾽ ἂν πάθωσιν οὔ. There 
is a New England saying, “If a man 
does you a favour, he follows you with a 
tomahawk all your lifetime.” 

7. προαχθήσομαι: cf. προήχθην (sc. 
τάξαι), VIII. 71.—Omws ὑπείλημμαι, as 7 
have been understood, i.e. the general 
opinion which has been formed of me. 

8. ἀρκεῖ μοι: sc. οὕτως ὑπειλῆφθαι. 


88 270—275. We have here a sort 
of peroration to the discourse on Fortune 


ov δὴ ποιήσω τοιοῦτον 


προσαχθήσομαι A2. 6 πώς1,. 
x, L; rovrovi vulg. 5. συγχωρῶ σοι 
αἰτίαν L, vulg.; αἰτίαν om. Σ', Vom., Bl. 


(§§ 252—275), in which the orator comes 
at last to the precise point of his oppo- 
nent’s remark, that Demosthenes has 
brought ill-luck upon every person or 
state with which he had to do (Aesch. 
11. 114). Hitherto Demosthenes has 
spoken far more of his ‘‘fortunes”’ than ~ 
of his “fortune.” See remarks before 
notes on § 252. 

ὃ 270. 2. ὑπὸ τοῦτον τὸν ἥλιον, as 
we say, under the Sun: ‘‘klingt fast 
poetisch” (Bl.). See Il. v. 267, ὅσσοι 
ἔασιν ὑπ’ ἠώ τ᾽ ἠέλιόν τε: Od. XV. 349, 
ζώουσιν ὑπ᾽ αὐγὰς ἠελίοιο. In prose 
ὑπό with the accus. generally implies ex- 
tension towards something, an idea which 
we miss here. 

3. ἀθῷος, unharmed: cf. ὃ 125", where 
we have the original meaning, free from 
θωή, penalty, as in XXIII. 78, ταύτης μὲν 
(δίκης) ἀθῷος ἀφίεται, he ts acguztted. 

4. δυναστείας : see §§ 67°, 3227. 

6. πάντων γεγενῆσθαι, Las fallen to 
the lot of us all: the subject is τὴν ἐμὴν 
εὐ δυστυχίαν, and πάντων refers to all the 
Athenians (cf. § 2724) opposed to τῶν. 
μηδεπώποτ᾽ ἰδόντων ἐμέ in § 271. He 
would admit (he implies) that his own 
fortune had extended to Athens, were it — 
not that foreign states had suffered the 
same ill fortune. 


T@V 
Np 


ότι καὶ τῷ 


8271. 3. κατ᾽ ἄνδρα, i.e. zxadividuals, 
85 opposed to πόλεις and ἔθνη. 
φοράν τινα πραγμάτων, a rush of 
events: φορά in this sense (zzfetus) 
Belongs to φέρομαι, used as in Bia φέρε- 
, Plat. Phaedr. 254 A, and φερόμενος, 
with a rush (M.T. 837): φοράν, crop, in 
me 01°, belongs to φέρω, bear, produce. 
aD. οὐχ οἵαν ἔδει, zo0t what it should be 
4 ΩΝ in time, M.T. 417); ἔδει here 
5. ought to be (but is not), whereas δεῖ 
would be simply ought to be eo θι στρ, 
τῳ othing). 
Ἃ] 272. 3. ἐπιβάλλει: 
τὸ ἐπιβάλλον μέρος, ὃ 2545. 
4 ἅπασι: sc. τοῖς ᾿Αθηναίοις (cf. 
ν, ὃ 270°).—ei μὲν... ἐβουλευόμην 
st, while ἦν ἄν, its apodosis, is 


see hote on 


ΠΕΡΙ TOY ZTE®ANOY 


19I 


σθαι. εἰ δὲ Kai τῶν μηδεπώποτ᾽ ἰδόντων ἐμὲ μηδὲ φωνὴν 271 
> , 3 A \ \ \ \ / Cel 
πον ἐμοῦ πολλοὶ πολλὰ καὶ δεινὰ πεπόνθασι, μὴ 
μόνον κατ᾽ ἄνδρα, ἀλλὰ καὶ πόλεις ὅλαι καὶ ἔθνη, πόσῳ 
i. ee” καὶ ἀληθέστερον τὴν ἁπάντων, ὡς ἔοικεν, ἀνθρώ- 


ὑχῇν,! sony καὶ φοράν᾽ τίνα πραγμάτων χαλεπὴν καὶ 5 
VX οἵαν ἔδει τούτων αἰτίαν ἡγεῖσθαι. 


> \ \ FoR > 5 Ν 
ευ MEV Yap eyo KAT €M@AUTOV 


αὐτοκράτωρ περὶ τῶν πραγμάτων ἐβουλευόμην, ἢν ἂν τοῖς 5 

ὮΝ» Cre ε A ne, > ἴω 5 Ν [μὰν] Ν 5 
ἄλλοις ρήτορσιν ὑμῖν eu αἰτιᾶσθαι: εἰ δὲ παρῆτε μὲν ἐν 273 
Bras ἐκκλησίαις ἁπάσαις, ἀεὶ δ᾽ ἐν κοινῷ τὸ συμφέρον ἣ 
πόλις προὐτίθει σκοπεῖν, πᾶσι δὲ, 


ταῦτ, oe τότ᾽ ἄριστ᾽ 


gs) ot 


εἶναι, Kal μάλιστα σοὶ (οὐ γὰρ ἐπ᾽ εὐνοίᾳ γ᾽ ἐμοὶ παρεχώρεις 
ἐλπίδων καὶ ζήλου καὶ τιμῶν, ἃ πάντα προσῆν τοῖς τότε 5 
, ery. > A x") 8 A 9 , ε ΄ 
πραττομένοις ὑπ ἐμοῦ, ahha τῆς ἀληθείας ἡττώμενος δηλον- 
δὲ » 3 ἴον , la > > “A Ν 
μηδὲν ἔχειν εἰπεῖν βέλτιον), πῶς οὐκ ἀδικεῖς καὶ 


8 271. 1. ἵἔδότων (» above line) 2. ἐμὲ om. Α2. 4. μόνον om. Α2. 
᾿ ἄνδρας V6. oh καὶ ἀληθ. om. Az. 5. καινὴν F, 

ΕΝ §272. 1. od οὖν At. 2. Toutovai L. πολιτευόμενον O, Saw εἰ 
᾿ μὴ καὶ At. 2. 5. αὐτοκράτωρ ὧν vulg.; ὧν om. Σ, TAWA Ts 6. ἐμὲ om. ΟἹ. 
- $273. 2. ἁπάσαις, ἀεὶ δ' ἐν κοινῷ Σ, L; ἁπάσαις ἀεὶ, ἐν κοινῷ δὲ _vulg. 
3. ταὐτὰ Y. τότ᾽ ἐδόκει ταῦτ᾽ V6. 4- γέμοι Ar. 7. 70 (for τῷ) Φ; τῶν Ol. 


κατ᾽ ἐμαυτὸν αὐτοκράτωρ, az αὖ- 


solute autocrat: cf. αὐτὸς αὐτοκράτωρ, 
ened 
ὃ 235 

ὃ 273. 2. ἐν κοινῷ... προὐτίθει σκο- 


πεῖν, put forward for public consideration: 
cf. IV. 1, εἰ περὶ καινοῦ τινος πράγματος 
προὐτίθετο λέγειν. See § 1022, προτίθησι 
βουλήν, and ὃ 2364, ἐξ ἴσου προὐτίθετε. 
γνώμας προτιθέναι often means fo open 
a debate: cf. Thuc. I. 1308. and 111. 38%, 
τῶν προθέντων αὖθις λέγειν, where λέγειν 
is like σκοπεῖν here. 

4. ἐπ᾽ εὐνοίᾳ, out of devotion, cor- 
responds to ἀλλὰ ἡττώμενος (6).—épol is 
dative of advantage with παρεχώρεις, but 
is also felt with ἐπ᾽ εὐνοίᾳ. 

5. ἵήλου, pride: see 88 120° (with 
note), 217°. 


σὺ τοίνυν ταῦτ᾽ 272 
ἀφεὶς ἐμὲ τὸν παρὰ τουτοισὶ πεπολιτευμένον αἰτιᾷ, καὶ ταῦτ᾽ ~ ° 
317 εἰδὼς ὅτι, καὶ εἰ μὴ τὸ ὅλον, μέρος γ᾽ ἐπιβάλλει τῆς βλασφη- 

μίας ἅπασι, καὶ μάλιστα σοί. 


192 AHMOZOENOY2 


| ὃ Ν ἴω , lal 9 “ e Pa 3 > x , 
εινὰ ποιεῖς τούτοις νῦν ἐγκαλῶν ὧν TOT οὐκ εἴχες λέγειν 
A ”~ > ἴω a 
274 βελτίω; παρὰ μὲν τοίνυν τοῖς ἄλλοις ἔγωγ᾽ ὁρῶ πᾶσιν 
ἴω > 
ἀνθρώποις Siwpiopeva καὶ τεταγμένα πως τὰ τοιαῦτα. ἀδι- 
ἴω 7 
κεῖ τις ἑκών: ὀργὴν καὶ τιμωρίαν κατὰ τούτου. ἐξήμαρτέ 
lal ¥y 3 la 
τις ἄκων: συγγνώμην ἀντὶ τῆς τιμωρίας τούτῳ. οὔτ᾽ ἀδικῶν 
5 τις οὔτ᾽ ἐξαμαρτάνων, εἰς τὰ πᾶσι δοκοῦντα συμφέρειν ἑαυτὸν 
Ν 3 / 3.) / > 3 / ὑδὲ ὃ 
δοὺς οὐ κατώρθωσε μεθ᾽ ἁπάντων" οὐκ ὀνειδίζειν οὐδὲ λοιδο- 
lal lal 4 
275 ρεῖσθαι τῷ τοιούτῳ δίκαιον, ἀλλὰ συνάχθεσθαι. φανήσεται 


8. εἰπεῖν (for λέγειν) Ατ. 
§ 274. 5. 
ὀργὴν, τιμωρίαν, συγγνώμη i 
αὐτοῦ vulg. ἐξήμαρται L. 4. 
τούτῳ) A2. 5. ἐξαμαρτὼν Ar. 
6. μετὰ πάντων At, F, Y. 
>! (τῷ in mg.). 
ὃ 275. 1. 


8. ov: with βελτίω. 

Westermann thinks the argument of 
this section not quite fair (‘nicht ganz 
ehrlich”), as it is not to be assumed that 
Aeschines assented to all which he did 
not oppose. But, apart from the obvious 
irony of parts of the argument (as in οὐ 
yap ἐπ᾽ εὐνοίᾳ x.T-d.), it was surely not 
too much to expect of the acknowledged 


‘leader of the opposition” in such δ΄ 


desperate crisis, that he should at least 
protest strongly against measures of such 
vital importance as those which he cen- 
sures afterwards, even if he could not 
propose any positive measures himself. 
Now it is an important part of the argu- 
ment of Demosthenes, that Aeschines 
said nothing whatever on such occasions 
as the sudden seizure of Elatea by Philip. 
See § 1914, σοῦ δ᾽ dddvov...kabnuevor : 
see the whole passage, §§ 188—19I. The 
only ground on which such neglect can 
be excused is the one here assumed, that 
the opposition had no better plan to 
propose. Even this inability is not made 
a direct charge against Aeschines; it is 
merely used as a defence against his 
unqualified condemnation of the course 
taken by the state. The plain truth is, 
of course, that Aeschines really wished 
to let Philip have his own way at this 
time. 


8 274. 1. παρὰ.. ἀνθρώποις : see two 


ὀργὴν, τιμωρίαν, cvyyvauny (4) Σ, Ar; ὀργὴ; τιμωρία, συγγνώμη vulg.; 
κατὰ τούτου >, L, Y, ®, AI; Kata Tov V6; κατ᾽ 
ἄκων (corr. from ἑκών) L. 


οὐκ om. O. 


φανησται (€ above) Σ᾿; φανήσεται L; φανήσεται τοίνυν vulg. 


ee 


᾿ 
| 


---τ 


αὐτῷ (for 
φέρειν (συμ- in mg.) 2. αὑτὸν V6. 
7. τῷ τοιούτῳ L, vulg. ; τοιούτῳ 


similar cases of παρά in ἃ 297" .-τοῖς 
ἄλλοις πᾶσιν, i.e. all except Aesch.: οἵ. 
ἅπαντας ἀνθρώπους, § 275%. 

2. τὰ τοιαῦτα, i.e. such (principles) 
as the following, explained by the state- 
ments in 2- .---ἀδικεῖ τις ἑκών, a man 
(let us suppose) zs guilty of voluntary 
injustice. We have three such supposi- — 
tions in independent sentences, with 
paratactic replies or apodoses. For a 
similar arrangement see § 117» ἐπέδωκα, 
ἦρχον, ἀδίκως ἦρξα, with the replies. See | 
also § 198. | | 

3. ὀργὴν καὶ τιμωρίαν: sc. δότε, or | 
διωρισμένην ὁρῶ. oe : 

4. οὔτ᾽ ἀδικῶν τις οὔτ᾽ ἐξαμαρτάνων, 
i.e. one who neither is guilty of injustice 
nor errs (SC. ἀκών). 7 

6. μεθ᾽ ἁπάντων, i.e. 772 common with { 
everybody. 4 

On the distinction of ἀδικήματα, ἁμαρ- ' 
τήματα, and ἀτυχήματα here recognized, 4 
Dissen quotes Arist. Rhet. I. 13, 16: ἐφ᾽ 
οἷς τε γὰρ δεῖ συγγνώμην ἔχειν, ἐπιεικῆ, 
ταῦτα, καὶ τὸ τὰ ἁμαρτήματα καὶ τὰ ἀδι- 
κήματα μὴ τοῦ ἴσου ἀξιοῦν (sc. ἐπιεικές — 
ἐστὶ), μηδὲ δὲ ἁμαρτήματα καὶ τὰ ἀτυχῖθε 
para’ ἔστι δ᾽ ἀτυχήματα μὲν ὅσα παράλογα | 
καὶ μὴ ἀπὸ μοχθηρίας, ἁμαρτήματα δὲ ὅσα 
μὴ παράλογα καὶ μὴ ἀπὸ πονηρίας, ἀδική- 
ματα δὲ ὅσα μήτε παράλογα ἀπὸ πονηρίαϑ 
τ᾽ ἐστίν: τὰ γὰρ δι᾽ ἐπιθυμίαν ἀπὸ πο- 
νηρίας. 


TEP] TOY STEANOY 


193 
a A ae » Ψ 3 / Ἂ / 3 \ Nese ΄ 
ταῦτα πάνθ᾽ οὕτως οὐ μόνον τοῖς νόμοις, ἀλλὰ καὶ ἡ φύσις 
Ν aA Ν ΩΝ , » 
αὐτὴ τοῖς ἀγράφοις νομίμοις καὶ Tots ἀνθρωπίνοις ἤθεσι 
na ν 
διώρικεν. Αἰσχίνης τοίνυν τοσοῦτον ὑπερβέβληκεν ἁπαντας 
ν Ν “Ὁ 
ἀνθρώπους ὠμότητι καὶ συκοφαντίᾳ ὥστε καὶ ὧν αὐτὸς ὡς 5 
’, ~ 3 la A 
ἀτυχημάτων ἐμέμνητο, καὶ ταῦτ᾽ ἐμοῦ κατηγορεῖ. 
N δ A ΕἾ ) 5. Χ ε an \ Doe 
Kat πρὸς τοῖς ἀλλοις, ὥσπερ αὑτὸς ἁπλῶς καὶ μετ 276 
2. ἐν τοῖς L, vulg. ἐν om. 2, Ar. 


νόμοις MSS.3 νομίμοις Dind. 3. νομίμοις, 


2, vulg.; νόμοις L, O (corr.), Dind. 
(for τοσοῦτον) V6. ὑπερβέβηκεν O. 
§ 276. 1. αὐτὸς om. ΑΙ. 


| § 275. 2. τοῖς νόμοις (without ἐν), 
| by the laws: cf. § 1184, and Xx. 57, ταῦτα 
; kal νόμοις τισὶ καὶ δόξαις διώρισται. 
τ΄ 4. τοῖς ἀγράφοις νομίμοις, dy the prin- 
ciples of unwritten law, further explained 
by Tots ἀνθρωπίνοις ἤθεσι: cf. ὃ 1147. The 
- unwritten law is known as the law of 
Nature, the moral law, the divine law, 
or the higher law, the law which is not 
alia lex Romae, alia Athenis. See Plat. 
Leg. 793 A, ταῦτ᾽ ἔστι πάντα τὰ καλούμενα 
ὑπὸ τῶν πολλών ἄγραφα νόμιμα" καὶ ods 
πατρίους νόμους ἐπονομάζουσιν, οὐκ ἄλλα 
ἐστὶν ἢ τὰ τοιαῦτα ξύμπαντα....δεσμοὶ yap 
᾿ς οὗτοι πάσης εἰσὶ πολιτείας, μεταξὺ πάντων 
t ὄντες τῶν ἐν γράμμασι τεθέντων τε Kal κει- 
ο΄ μένων καὶ τῶν ἔτι τεθησομένων. Aristotle 
_ distinguishes two kinds of unwritten law, 
one the κοινὸς νόμος, ὁ κατὰ φύσιν, the 
universal law of Nature, the other a 
branch of the special law of particular 
States, by which the defects of the written 
law may be remedied, that is, τὸ ἐπιεικές, 
_ equity. See Rhet. 1. 13, §§ 1, 2: λέγω 
δὲ νόμον τὸν μὲν ἴδιον τὸν δὲ κοινὸν, ἴδιον 
μὲν τὸν ἑκάστοις ὡρισμένον πρὸς αὑτοὺς, 
καὶ τοῦτον τὸν μὲν ἄγραφον τὸν δὲ γεγραμ- 
“μένον, κοινὸν δὲ τὸν κατὰ φύσιν. ἔστι γὰρ, 
ὃ μαντεύονταί τι πάντες, φύσει κοινὸν 
δί ζάαιον καὶ ἄδικον, κἂν μηδεμία κοινωνία 
πρὸς ἀλλήλους ἢ μηδὲ συνθήκη, οἷον καὶ 


ι 


1) 


1 
t 
Ϊ 
i 
Ι 


| 


} 
| 


ὅτι δίκαιον ἀπειρημένον θάψαι τὸν ἸΠολυ- 
velkn, ὡς φύσει ὃν τοῦτο δίκαιον. He then 
tes Antig. 456, 457, οὐ γάρ τι... ἐξ ὅτου 
wm, and the verses of Empedocles: 
MAG τὸ μὲν πάντων νόμιμον διά τ᾽ 
᾿ εὐρυμέδοντος 


σ. 7); 


τά 


ἤθεσι L, vulg.; om. 2; ἔθεσι Dind. 


4. οὕτως 


καὶ eh κατηγόρει Al. 


αἰθέρος ἠνεκέως τέταται διά τ᾽ ἀπλέτου 
αὖ γῆς. 

In I. 13, §$ 11, 12 Aristotle more distinctly 
states the distinction of this ‘‘ universal 
law” and τὸ ἐπιεικές, eguity: τῶν δ᾽ ἀγρά- 
ῴφων δύο ἐστὶν εἴδη" ταῦτα δ᾽ ἐστὶ τὰ μὲν 
καθ᾽ ὑπερβολὴν ἀρετῆς καὶ κακίας (above the 
legal standart, Cope),...7& δὲ τοῦ ἰδίου νόμου 
καὶ γεγραμμένου ἔλλειμμα. τὸ γὰρ ἐπιεικὲς 
δοκεῖ δίκαιον εἷναι, ἔστι δὲ ἐπιεικὲς τὸ παρὰ 
(deyond) τὸν γεγραμμένον νόμον δίκαιον. 

5. ὠμότητι: cf. ὠμότερος, ὃ 2128.---ὧς 
ἀτυχημάτων : see Aesch. III. 57, τῶν δὲ 
ἀτυχημάτων ἁπάντων Δημοσθένην αἴτιον 
γεγενημένον. 

§§ 276- 296. Here Demosthenes 
begins by alluding to the attempt of 
Aeschines to represent him as a skilful 
sophist and rhetorician, who will impose 
on the judges by his wily arts. He retorts 
by showing that his own oratorical power 
has always been exerted in behalf of 
Athens, while that of Aeschines has been 
used to help her enemies or to gratify 
personal malice. He refers to the testi- 
mony of the citizens in choosing him to 
deliver the eulogy on those who fell at 
Chaeronea, as a proof of his patriotism. 
Finally, he declares that the present 
calamities of Greece have been caused 
by men of the stamp of Aeschines in 
various Greek States ; and he gives a black 
list of these traitors who have betrayed 
their countries to the common enemy. 

8 276. 1. ὥσπερ... εἰρηκὼς, i.e. posing 
as one who had always spoken his own 
thoughts honestly and loyally: we gene- 
rally translate (for convenience) as zf he 


13 


194 AHMOZOENOY2 


> / / > Ν Ν Υ͂ / > \ 4, 
ς εὐνοίας πάντας εἰρηκὼς τοὺς λόγους, φυλάττειν ἐμὲ καὺ 
A Ψ \ 3.4. ΄ \ 

τηρεῖν ἐκέλευεν, OTMS μὴ παρακρούσομαι μηδ᾽ ἐξαπατήσω, 81 
δεινὸν καὶ γόητα καὶ σοφιστὴν καὶ τὰ τοιαῦτ᾽ ὀνομάζων, OS, 

~ Te τς / x Ν 7 θ᾽ ra rt , » r j i Sn 

5 ἐὰν πρότερός τις εἴπῃ TA προσόν εαὐυτῳ περι ἄλλου, καὶ δὴ 
ταῦθ᾽ οὕτως ἔχοντα, καὶ οὐκέτι τοὺς ἀκούοντας σκεψομένους 


e 


¢ 


’ 3 5 / > ε “A λέ > \ δ᾽ 7S. 4 x 
τίς ποτ᾽ αὐτός ἐστιν ὁ ταῦτα λέγων. ἐγὼ ὁ old. OTL γιγνω- 
wn 9 la Ν ’ὔ 
σκετε τοῦτον ἅπαντες, καὶ πολὺ τούτῳ μᾶλλον ἢ ἐμοὶ νομίζετε 

adra προσεῖναι. κἀκεῖν᾽ εὖ οἶδ᾽ ὅτι τὴν ἐμὴν δεινότητα--- 

ε an “ ἴω be 
τω yap. καίτοι ἔγωγ᾽ ὁρῶ τῆς τῶν λεγόντων δυνάμεως 
nA ee a ε A 
τοὺς ἀκούοντας TO πλεῖστον κυρίους: ἡ ὡς yap ἂν vpEIS 

5 ᾽ὔ Ν N\ 4 » 3 > ἊΝ 4 c 4 

ἀποδέξησθε καὶ πρὸς ἕκαστον ἔχητ᾽ εὐνοίας, οὕτως ὁ λέγων 
5 ἔδοξε φρονεῖν] 

τοιαύτη, ταύτην μὲν εὑρήσετε πάντες ἐν τοῖς κοινοῖς ἐξεταζο- 
/ ε \ ε “A SiN \ > la 9.5 Ὁ a 39> 3Q7 x 

μένην ὑπὲρ ὑμῶν ἀεὶ Kat οὐδαμοῦ καθ᾽ ὑμῶν οὐδ᾽ ἰδίᾳ, τὴν 

δὲ τούτου τοὐναντίον οὐ μόνον τῷ λέγειν ὑπὲρ τῶν ἐχθρῶν, 


pee I es > \ 2 a , 3 , 
EL ὃ OVV ἐστι καὶ TAP εμου TLS εμπειριᾶ 


3. ἐκέλευσεν A2. παρακρούσομαι Σ; παρακρούσωμαι L, vulg. ‘4. ὡς om. 
Az. 5. ἐὰν μὴ Az. εἴποι Y. οὐκ ἔστι (for οὐκέτι) V6. 47. we (for 
tis) V6. 9. τοιαῦτα V6. 

8 277. 1. καὶ ἐκεῖνο δ᾽ vulg.; δ᾽ om. Σ, L, Ar. 3. τὸ πλεῖστον μέρος vulg. ; 
μέρος om. Σ, 1.1. κυρίους Σ, L; κυρίους ὄντας vulg. 4- ἔχοις O. 6. ἐπὶ 
(for év) Y. 7. ἀεὶ ὑπὲρ O. ἰδίαν At. 


had spoken (quasi vero dixisset, West.), 
though there is nothing conditional in 
the participle with ὥσπερ (without ἄν), 
which merely expresses comparison (M.T. 
867): having, as it were, spoken, would be 
more correct, though less clear. See wo- 
περ οὐχ, ὃ 323°, and note on ὡς (4). 

3. ἐκέλευεν : sc. ὑμᾶς .---ὅπως μὴ παρα- 
Kpovoopat: an object clause after φυλάτ- 
τειν and τηρεῖν, though its subject appears 
by attraction (ἐμὲ) in the leading clause 
(M.T. 3047). This is a reply to Aesch. 
16, 174, 206, 207, and other passages. 

4—6. @S...00Tws ἔχοντα (accus. abs.), 
1.6. assuming that this must needs be so. 
ὡς has no more conditional force than 
ὥσπερ (1), though we find it convenient 
to use as Ζ7 in translation (M.T. 864): 
notice οὐκέτι with σκεψομένους, showing 
that there is nothing conditional in the 
expression. —ovKétt σκεψομένους, wzdl mot 
further consider: cf. καὶ δὴ (5), implying 
without further thought, alsbald (Bl.); so 
XX. 65, καὶ δὴ λελυμένας. 


§ 277. 2. ἔστω γάρ, well! grant 
that I have it. Having broken his sen- 
tence, he proceeds to say that the hearers 
have it in their power to neutralize the 
highest gifts of eloquence by refusing to 
listen. See XIX. 340, αἱ μὲν τοίνυν ἄλλαι 
δυνάμεις ἐπιεικῶς εἰσιν αὐτάρκεις, ἡ δὲ τοῦ 
λέγειν, ἂν τὰ παρ᾽ ὑμῶν τῶν ἀκουόντων 
ἀντιστῇ, διακόπτεται. 

3. ὡς dv...mpds ἕκαστον ἔχητ᾽ εὐνοίας, 
i.e. according to your good-will towards 


cach, εὐνοίας being partitive with ws, as” 


in els τοῦτο εὐνοίας. 

4. οὕτως φρονεῖν, i.e. εὖ or κακῶς 
φρονεῖν. 

5. ἐμπειρία, substituted modestly for 
the stronger δεινότητα of ]. 1, the original 


construction being resumed by ταύτην (6). 


6. ἐξεταζομένην ὑπὲρ ὑμῶν, marshalled 
on your side, the familiar military figure: 


see note on ἃ 173%, and ἐξηταζόμην in 


§ 173°. 
8. τοὐναντίον (adv.): 
εὑρήσετε. 


56. ἐξεταζομένην 


TOY =TEbANOY 195 


ΠΕΡΙ 


a 9 Ν Ν ¥ ee 4 , A x , , Ν 
ἀλλα καὶ εἰ τις ἐλύπησέ τι τοῦτον ἢ προσέκρουσέ που, κατὰ 
συμφέρει τῇ το 

¥ δ \ 9 \ » \ »  » 
οὔτε γὰρ τὴν ὀργὴν οὔτε τὴν ἔχθραν ovT 278 
᾿ » > 3 Ν an , Ν Ἷ 3 \ rs “Ὁ 
ἄλλ᾽ οὐδὲν τῶν τοιούτων τὸν καλὸν κἀγαθὸν πολίτην δεῖ 


δι 


*y 4 > Ἂς > “A ’ὔ 50.» 9. p32 
τούτων. ov yap αὐτῇ δικαίως, οὐδ᾽ ἐφ 


᾿ πόλει, χρῆται. 


\ ε Ν “A a 3 I \ 3 “ ε “A 
τοὺς ὑπὲρ τῶν κοινῶν εἰσεληλυθότας δικαστὰς ἀξιοῦν αὑτῷ 
“ 9. WC εὖ , > ε A > va 3 ἐν / 
βεβαιοῦν, οὐδ᾽ ὑπὲρ τούτων εἰς ὑμᾶς εἰσιέναι, ἀλλὰ μάλιστα 
Ν ᾿ » ae lal , 5 Th he att SOE | 4 id Ν 
μὲν μὴ ἔχειν ταῦτ᾽ ἐν τῇ φύσει, εἰ δ᾽ ap ἀνάγκη, πράως καὶ 5 


᾿ς μετρίως διακείμεν᾽ ἔχειν. ἐν τίσιν οὖν σφοδρὸν εἶναι τὸν 


: ΓΞ l4 Ν ἊΝ ed “A 3 @ “ σ 

πολιτευόμενον καὶ τὸν ῥήτορα δεῖ; ἐν οἷς τῶν ὅλων τι 
4 A XN a 

κινδυνεύεται TH πόλει, καὶ ἐν οἷς πρὸς τοὺς ἐναντίους ἐστὶ 


Ἰ 


1ο. αὐτὴ Ὁ. 

8 278. 5. 
ἀνάγκη Σ. “6. 
eye; Te om. 2, L, ΑἹ. 2. 
§ 279. 1. 5 om. ΟἹ, 2 


δικαστὰς eloeX. At. 


στεφάνου (αὑτοῦ om.) V6. 


9. κατὰ τούτων (sc. τῷ λέγειν), op- 
ῃ posed to ὑπὲρ τῶν ἐχθρῶν. τούτων refers 
_ to tts, by a carelessness or indifference not 
uncommon: see ὃ 99* and 11. 18, εἴ τις... 
. ete Weare all familiar with anybody 
ecoming them in conversation. The 
whole expression εἴ τις ἐλύπησέ τι.. «κατὰ 
τούτων 15 opposed to οὐδ᾽ ἰδίᾳ (7), as ὑπὲρ 
τῶν ἐχθρῶν is opposed to ὑπὲρ ὑμῶν (7). 
West. thinks that there is an allusion to 
Timarchus here and in ὃ 307°. 
ὃ 278. 3. ὑπὲρ τῶν κοινῶν, with 
εἰσεληλυθότας, i.e. to give judgment for the 
of the State, opposed to ὀργὴν...βε- 
v.—dtioty αὑτῷ βεβαιοῦν, fo ask 
m) to confirm for him, i.e. by con- 
mning his opponent. 
ὑπὲρ τούτων, for these ends, i.e. to 
ify his ὀργή or ἔχθρα.--- μάλιστα μὲν, 
of all. 
5. εἰ δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ἀνάγκη, 1.6. but if after all 
he must have these feelings. 


ἁυτῷ Σ; αὐτῷ! L, vulg. 
διακείμεν᾽ D, L, Ar; διακείμενον vulg. Ks 
9. γάρ ἐστι AI. 
dikns Y; 
3: αὐυτοῦτστεφάνου =, ov over second τ Σ΄; αὐτοῦ τοῦ L; τοῦ om. vulg.; ὑπὲρ τοῦ 
νῦν κατηγΎ. Al; κατηγ. νῦν vulg.; νῦν om. 2, L. 


᾿ τῷ δήμῳ, ἐν τούτοις" ταῦτα γὰρ γενναίου καὶ ἀγαθοῦ πολίτου. 
319 μηδενὸς δ᾽ ἀδικήματος πώποτε δημοσίου--- προσθήσω δὲ μηδ᾽ 
ὌΝ Si 3 , A Ns fa) εν an 
ἰδίου---δίκην ἀξιώσαντα λαβεῖν παρ᾽ ἐμοῦ, μήθ᾽ ὑπὲρ τῆς 
πόλεως μήθ᾽ ὑπὲρ αὑτοῦ, στεφάνου καὶ ἐπαίνου κατηγορίαν 


5. dy over 
rt I. 8. ἐστί τι 


δίκηνς yr ἀξιώσοντα BE 


6. ἐν τίσιν... δεῖ; i.e. when should an 
orator use all his powers ? 

7. τῶν ὅλων TL, any of the supreme 
(extere) interests of the State: cf. 88 288, 
303”. 

8. ἐστὶ τῷ δήμῳ, the people have to do 
etc. 

g. ἐν τούτοις: with strongest emphasis, 
in reply to ἐν τίσιν; (6). 

§ 279. Still answering the question ἐν 
τίσιν...δεῖ; (§ 278°), he describes the 
present suit as one which does not justify 
vehemence in an orator. 

I. μηδ᾽ ἰδίου (sc. ἀδικήματος) continues: 
the construction of δημοσίου: cf. VIII. 39, 
40, ἐχθρὸς ὅλῃ τῇ πόλει.. 
τοῖς ἐν τῇ πόλει πᾶσιν ἀνθρώποις. 

35. στεφάνου... κατηγορίαν, az accu- 
sation against a crown and α vote of thanks 
(i.e. against a proposition to confer these) : 
nearly all decrees conferring a crown had 
the words ἐπαινέσαι καὶ στεφανῶσαι. 


13—2 


«προσθήσω δὲ καὶ 


279 


ah, 


196 ΔΗΛΛΟΣΘΕΝΟῪΣ 


ἜΡΟΝ 9 Ξ ‘ 
ἥκειν συνεσκευασμένον καὶ τοσουτουσὶ λόγους ἀνηλωκέναι 
9 ¥ Ν / Ν / 5 "ἢ & 

ς ἰδίας ἔχθρας καὶ φθόνου καὶ μικροψυχίας ἐστὶ σήμειον, 
3 Ἂς nm Ν \ \ εὐ Αν, x | Ae b oat Ἂ lal 
οὐδενὸς χρηστοῦ. τὸ δὲ δὴ καὶ τοὺς πρὸς ἐμ αὑτὸν ἀγῶνας — : 
ἴω ς ΄ tN be ’ὔ 
280 ἐάσαντα νῦν ἐπὶ τόνδ᾽ ἥκειν καὶ πᾶσαν ἔχει κακίαν. καὶ β 
la) 3 ὔ > / / peal! / - : 
μοι δοκεῖς ἐκ τούτων, Αἰσχίνη, λόγων ἐπίδειξίν τινα καὶ 
φωνασκίας βουλόμενος ποιήσασθαι τοῦτον προελέσθαι τὸν 
ae 9 ΕΣ Vs 5 Ν ia) ᾿' »» δ᾽ 
ἀγῶνα, οὐκ ἀδικήματος οὐδενὸς λαβεῖν μος (av. [ἔστι 
la 3 “A 
ς οὐχ ὁ λόγος τοῦ ῥήτορος, Αἰσχίνην τίμιον, οὐδ᾽ ὁ τόνος τῆς 
ἊΜ 5 Ἂς Ν 3 Ἂς ~ A “A \ Ν Ν 
φωνῆς, ἀλλὰ τὸ ταῦτα προαιρεῖσθαι τοῖς πολλοῖς καὶ τὸ τους 
A al fy “Ὁ Ν ν 
281 αὐτοὺς μισεῖν καὶ φιλεῖν οὕσπερ ἂν ἡ πατρίς. ὃ γὰρ οὕτως 
¥ \ N - hat 9 ΄ y 9 le ee my 372 @ ε 
ἔχων τὴν ψυχὴν, οὗτος Em εὐνοίᾳ πάντ ἐρει" ὁ ἀφ᾽ ὧν ἡ 
πόλις προορᾶται κίνδυνόν τιν᾽ ἑαυτῇ, τούτους θεραπεύων οὐκ 
Sak A ΑΝ ε a a a mA ὑδὲ A 3 , 
ἐπὶ τῆς αὐτῆς ὁρμεῖ τοῖς πολλοῖς, OVKOVY OVOE τῆς ἀσφαλείας 


Ἂν 3 Ν δ ,ὔ 5 3 ε “~ 5 4 5 Ν 
5 τὴν αὑτὴν EXEL προσδοκίαν. ἀλλ΄ —opas ;—eyw@* ταῦτα 


τοσούτους Al. 6. καὶ οὐδενὸς VO. 
καὶ Ar; om. L, vulg.; 


y. νῦν δ᾽ ἐπὶ F. 


ἐμὲ αὐτὸν Σ, L, vulg.; ἐμαυτὸν At. 


ἔχειν L; καὶ πᾶσαν ἔχει κακίαν om. Σ. 


8 280. 1. καί μοι Σ, L, O, Β, Ar; κἀμοὶ Vom., West. ; καὶ ἔμοιγε Y. 
2. λόγων ἐπίδ. τινα καὶ φωνασκίας >, L, F, Φ; τῶν λόγων, ἐπίδ. Twa φωνασκίας vulg. ; 
ἐκ τῶν λόγων τούτων, Αἰσχ. V6. 3. προσελέσθαι Y. 5. τίμιον Σ, 1,; τίμιος 


vulg. 6. ταῦτα At. 


τοὺς αὐτοὺς καὶ A2; τοὺς ἐχθροὺς V6. 


8 281. 2. οὕτως L. 3. κιἰνδυνόν τινα Σ', L; τινα κίνδυνον = (corr.), vulg. 


4. ἐπὶ τοῖς αὐτοῖς B, V6; ἐπὶ τῆς αὐτοῖς ΟἹ, αὐτῆς O (mg.). 


>, L; οὐκοὺν At. 5. Tavura At, O. 


4. συνεσκενασμένον, having trumped 
up. 

5. μικροψυχίας, léttleness of soul, op- 
posed to μεγαλοψυχία, ὃ 684: cf. § 269%. 

6. οὐδενὸς χρηστοῦ: neuter, cf. πάν- 
ra τὰ χρηστά, XX. τύ5.--τοὺς.. ἀγῶνας 
ἐάσαντα with ἐπὶ τόνδ᾽ ἥκειν recurs to the 
idea of § τό. 

7. «al strengthens πᾶσαν, the very 
depth of baseness: πᾶσαν ἔχει κακίαν, 

§ 280. 3. φωνασκίας, declamation 
(practice of voice): cf. § 308°, and φωνα- 
σκήσας and πεφωνασκηκώς in XIX. 255; 
330. 

6. ταὐτὰ προαιρεῖσθαι τοῖς πολλοῖς: 
cf. §§ 281°, 2924, 

8 281. 3. τούτους renews emphati- 
cally the antecedent implied in ἀφ᾽ w.— 
ovK,..dppet (sc. ἀγκύρας), does not ride at 
the same anchor, an oft-quoted saying. 
See Harpocr. under οὐκ ἐπὶ τῆς K.T.A., 


ὁρμᾶ V6. ὀύκουν 


and Apostolius XIII. 55 (Paroem. Gr. II. 
p. 591): both note the ellipsis of ἀγκύρας. 
Another expression was ἐπὶ δυοῖν ὁρμεῖ 
(sc. ἀγκύραιν), ἐπὶ τῶν ἀστεμφῶς ἐχόντων 
(Apostol. vil. 61), to which Solon refers 
in his comparison of Athens with her two 
senates to a ship with two anchors: Plut. 
Sol. 19, οἰόμενος ἐπὶ δυσὶ βουλαῖς ὥσπερ 
ἀγκύραις ὁρμοῦσαν ἧττον ἐν σάλῳ τὴν πόλιν 
ἔσεσθαι. See the singular turn given to 
the proverb in 101. 44. Cf. Soph. Ant. 
188—190, quoted in XIX. 247. 

4. οὔκουν οὐδὲ: the two negatives 
unite their force, and that of οὖν, ¢here- 
fore, remains: οὐκοῦν οὐδὲ would give es- 
sentially the same sense. 

5. ὁρᾷς; see οὐχ ὁρᾷς; 88 232°, 266°, 
and οὐ γὰρ; ὃ 1τ363.---ἐγώ: the ellipsis 
may be supplied from οὕτως ἔχων τὴν 
ψυχὴν (1), with the preceding τὸ TQUTG... 
φιλεῖν. 


di 


ΠΈΡΙ TOY STEANOY 197 


yap συμφέρονθ᾽ εἱλόμην τουτοισὶ, καὶ οὐδὲν ἐξαίρετον οὐδ᾽ 

Ἂν 

ἴδιον πεποίημαι. 
Ν \ 5 4 \ > , Ν ’ ἃ 

μετὰ τὴν μάχην πρεσβευτὴς ἐπορεύου πρὸς Φίλιππον, ὃς 
1 Ἢ a la val 

‘HY τῶν ἐκείνοις τοῖς χρόνοις συμφορῶν αἴτιος TH πατρίδι, 

καὶ ταῦτ᾽ ἀρνούμενος πάντα τὸν ἔμπροσθε χρόνον ταύτην 

τὴν χρείαν, 

ἐξι aT > ε \ λέ a aot A δ᾽ ἕ a 

ἐξαπατῶν; οὐχ ὁ μὴ λέγων a φρονεῖ; τῷ ὁ κηρυξ 

καταρᾶται δικαίως; οὐ τῷ τοιούτῳ; τί δὲ μεῖζον ἔχοι τις -- 


ΝΥ ΒΝ > ὑδὲ , \ a ἃ > , 
ap οὖν οὐδὲ σύ; Kal πῶς; los εὐθέως 282 


ε , » , aot τῆς Ν , 
ως TWTAVTES ισάασιν. KQLTOL τις Ο ΤῊΝ πόλιν 5 


Ν᾿ 5. κα 9 δ Ὁ Ν er? Kas \ ϑ uN A 
om QV ELTTELV ἀδίκημα κατ ἀνδρὸς PyNTOpOS 7 εὐ μὴ TAVTA φρονεῖ 
εἶτα σὺ φθέγγει καὶ 288 


6. τουτουσὶ L. 

8 282. 2. μάχην εὐθέως Νό. 
évom. Σ, O. 4. χρόνον tert B. 
ἐκέχησίαν (after καταρᾶται) Σ (yp), F (yp), ® 
Al. “ταῦτα ppover και ever Zt {?): 


τος vulg. 


§ 283. 1. ῴφθέγγῃ MSS. 


_ 6. εἱλόμην, in the sense of προαιρεῖσθαι 
(§ 2805). 
$282. 1. dp’ οὖν οὐδὲ σύ; can the 
same be said also of you? i.e. ovdev.. 
οίησαι. 4" 
2. πρεσβευτὴς πρὸς Φίλιππον: Ae- 
ines (III. 227) says of this, τῆς μάχης 
γενομένης.. ὑπὲρ τῆς σωτηρίας τῆς πόλεως 
ἐπρεσβεύομεν. Aeschines, Demades (from 
whom the peace was named, § 285°), and 
probably Phocion, went to Philip to ne- 
gotiate a peace after Chaeronea. As 
Blass remarks, it was very important that 
personae gratae should be sent on this 
al mission; ‘and Aeschines was well 
ified. See Hist. § 81. 
. ταύτην τὴν χρείαν : this, taken with 
ἔμπροσθε χρόνον, refers to earlier per- 
al intercourse with Philip. Aeschines 

is now less anxious to repudiate this 
wge, in the day of Alexander’s great 
ss in Asia: see III. 66, 6 yap μισα- 
ανδρος νυνὶ φάσκων εἷναι καὶ τότε μισο- 


e 


wv τὴν ᾿Αλεξάνδρου, and cf. 88 51, 


καταρᾶται: a most comprehensive 
se (dpa) was a part of the religious 


Ν ΄ Ν / a Chess 
Και λέγει; συ τοινυν οὐυτος εὑρέθης. 


πρεσβ. om. A2. a 


καὶ λέγει L (ταῦτα ἃ Ar); ταυτὰ καὶ φρονεῖ F. 9- 


ἱππὸς Δημοσθένης, ὁ τὴν ξενίαν ἐμοὶ 


> 


ἐν ἐκείνοις L, vulg. 5 : 
τίς ἦν A2. 7. Kad’ ἑκάστην 


(γρ). 8. a, 4. UO; Β: ἢ, om. F, 


ἢ εἰ 
ταῦτ᾽ ἃ φρονεῖ" καὶ χέγει = (corr. ); ταῦθ᾽ ἃ φρονεῖ 
Σ : 


οὗτος >, L, ΟἹ, B!, Ar; τοιοῦ- 


ceremony at the opening of each meeting 
of the Senate and Assembly. See XXIII. 
97: διόπερ καταρᾶται καθ’ ἑκάστην ἐκκλη- 
σίαν ὁ κῆρυξ...εἴ τις ἐξαπατᾷ λέγων ἢ 
βουλὴν ἢ δῆμον ἢ τὴν ἡλιαίαν. Add to 
this XIX. 70: ταῦθ᾽ ὑπὲρ ὑμῶν καθ᾽ ἑκάστην 
τὴν ἐκκλησίαν ὁ κῆρυξ εὔχεται νόμῳ προσ- 
τεταγμένα, καὶ ὅταν 7) βουλὴ καθῆται, παρ᾽ 
ἐκείνῃ πάλιν. (It is added that Aeschines, 
as ὑπογραμματεύων ὑμῖν καὶ ὑπηρετῶν TH 
βουλῇ, had the duty of dictating this curse 
to the herald.) Blass quotes Dinarch. 1. 47 
(of Demosth.), κατάρατος δὲ καθ᾽ ἑκάστην 
ἐκκλησίαν γινόμενος, ἐξεληλεγμένος δῶρα 
κατὰ τῆς πόλεως εἰληφὼς, ἐξηπατηκὼς δὲ 
καὶ τὸν δῆμον καὶ τὴν βουλὴν παρὰ τὴν 
ἀρὰν, καὶ ἕτερα μὲν λέγων ἕτερα δὲ 
φρονῶν, which shows that ὁ μὴ λέγων ἃ 
φρονεῖ (6) was included in the same curse. » 
See also Dinarch. 11. τό, ἀρὰς ποιούμενοι 
εἴ τις δῶρα λαμβάνων μετὰ ταῦτα (Blass 
μὴ ταὐτὰ) λέγει καὶ γιγνώσκει περὶ τῶν 
πραγμάτων, ἐξώλη τοῦτον εἶναι. See note 
on § 1307. 

9. οὗτος: cf. ἐφάνην οὗτος ἐγώ, ὃ 1731. 

8 283. 1. φθέγγει (Mss. φθέγγῃ): 
see note on § 119%, and cf. ἡγεῖ (2). 


198 AHMOSOENOY= 


βλέ ἰς τὰ τούτων πρόσωπα τολμᾷς; πότερ᾽ οὐχ ἡγεῖ 
έπειν εἰς τὰ τούτων πρ μᾷς; ρ᾽ οὐχ ny 
Ἂς ν 3 “Ὁ A“ ν \ / 
γιγνώσκειν αὐτοὺς ὅστις εἶ; ἢ τοσοῦτον ὕπνον καὶ λήθην 
ἅπαντας ἔχειν͵ ὥστ᾽ οὐ μεμνῆσθαι τοὺς λόγους ods ἐδημη- 
ς γόρεις ἐν τῷ πολέμῳ, καταρώμενος καὶ διομνύμενος μηδὲν 
3 \ \ » la 5 > SS ἃς ΒΟ 
εἶναι σοὶ καὶ Φιλίππῳ πρᾶγμα, ἀλλ᾽ ἐμὲ τὴν αἰτίαν σοι 
΄ ἧς f an By 9 3.9 > > 3 A 
ταύτην ἐπάγειν τῆς ἰδίας ἕνεκ᾽ ἔχθρας, οὐκ οὖσαν ἀληθῆ. 
ε 3 EI / / 3 ε ’ 3 εὖ ’, ’ 
ὡς δ᾽ ἀπηγγέλθη τάχισθ᾽ ἡ μάχη, οὐδὲν τούτων φροντίσας 
52 7 ε , Ν A , \ ΄ ὌΝ 
εὐθέως ὡμολόγεις καὶ προσεποιοῦ φιλίαν καὶ ξενίαν εἶναί 
σοι πρὸς αὐτὸν, τῇ μισθαρνίᾳ ταῦτα μετατιθέμενος τὰ 
> / > / ἊΣ »ν x ὃ / / > ’ὔ 
ὀνόματα: ἐκ ποίας γὰρ ἴσης ἢ δικαίας προφάσεως Αἰσχίνῃ 
a Tr θέ aA ee &é x aN x ΄ 
τῷ Γλαυκοθέας τῆς τυμπανιστρίας ξένος ἢ φίλος ἢ γνώριμος 
Ὅν ΄ 95. Δ εἰ 3 co A 3 ϑὺῦ»"» 4 STEN A Ν 
nv Φίλιππος ; ἐγὼ μὲν οὐχ ὁρῶ, ἀλλ ἐμισθῴθης ἐπὶ τῷ τὰ 
Ν / ὃ ΄ 
τουτωνὶ συμφέροντα ιαφθείρειν. ἀλλ᾽ ὅμως, οὕτω φανερῶς 
αὐτὸς εἰλημμένος προδότης καὶ κατὰ σαυτοῦ μηνυτὴς ἐπὶ 


2. τούτων X,Y; τουτωνὶ Τ,, να]ρ. ἡγεῖ Σ; ἡγὴ L; ἡγῇ ναὶ. 3. en" τοσοῦτον =: 


5. πολέμῳ Σ (Ay over πολ), L (δήμῳ over πολεμῳ), Ar; δήμῳ vulg. 


8 284. 2. εὐθέως Σ᾽ (εὐθὺς corr.); εὐθὺ" 1,, vulg. 4. Αἰσχίνῃ Σ, L, O, Y, 9; 
Αἰσχίνη vulg. 5. γλυκοθέας 2. 8. αὐτὸς Z, L, Ὁ, Ar. 2, B; αὐτοῖν vulg. 

3. ὅστις εἶ, who you are: ‘nicht guzs 6. τὴν αἰτίαν ταύτην : i.e. the charge 
sis, sondern gui sts” (Westermann). of intimate relations with Philip. 


4. ὥστ᾽ οὐ μεμνῆσθαι, (so) that they do 
not remember, not (so) as not to remember : 


§ 284. 2. ὡμολόγεις : 1.6. your friend- 
ship with Philip. -- φιλίαν καὶ ξενίαν : see | 


this is a regular case of ὥστε οὐ with the §§ 51, 52. 

infinitive in indirect discourse, where the 3. μετατιθέμενος, subitivating Ὁ 
direct form would have been τοσοῦτον ing by exchange). 
ὕπνον... ἔχουσιν ὥστ᾽ οὐ μέμνηνται (M. T. 5. τυμπανιστρίας, Ζ᾽γιόγεϊ-ὀδαζόγ : chen 
594). See Shilleto, Append. B. to Dem. τύμπανον, kettle-drum, was a favourite 


instrument in the Asiatic ceremonies 
described in §§ 259, 260. See Eur. 
Bacch. 58 (Dionysus speaks), αἴρεσθε 


de Falsa Leg., pp. 279—284, who dis- 
cusses this passage; Madvig, Synt. § 205, 
Anm. 3; Gildersleeve, Am. Jour. of 


Philol. vii. p. 174 (whose whole article 
deserves careful study). A few exceptional 
cases of ὥστε οὐ with the infinitive, no- 
ticed by Shilleto, p. 283, have never been 
satisfactorily explained (M. T. 598). 

5. ἐν τῷ πολέμῳ : Opposed to μετὰ THY 
μάχην (§ 2825) when Aeschines went on 
his embassy to Philip.—Katapapevos καὶ 
διομνύμενος, cusszng (i.e. protesting, with 
curses on himself if he was false) azd 
swearing; like Matth. Evang. xxvi. 74, 
τότε ἤρξατο (Πέτρος) καταθεματίζειν καὶ 
ὀμνύειν, then began he to curse and to 
swear. 


τἀπιχώρι᾽ ἐν πόλει Φρυγῶν τύμπανα, Ῥέας 
τε μητρὸς ἐμά θ᾽ εὑρήματα, with 123— 
ΤΡ τ Hel, 1346 ff., χαλκοῦ δ᾽ αὐδὰν! 
χθονίαν τύπανά 7’ ἔλαβε βυρσοτενῆ κ.τ.λ.: 
and Ar. Lys. 388, x# τυμπανισμὸς χοὶ 
πυκνοὶ σαβάζιοι. (See Β].)---ἢ γνώριμο 
(after ξένος ἢ φίλος), or even an acqguaint- 
ance. 

8. κατὰ cavrod...cupPBaot, az in- 
Sormer against yourself after the ate 
whereas παρὰ τὰ συμβάντα (cf. ὃ 285%) h he 
had denied everything which told against 
him (§ 2835). See § 1978 and note. 


ΠΕΡῚ TOY ZTEPANOY 199 


nw » \ 5 »* A \ 5 ? a 
τοῖς συμβᾶσι γεγονὼς, ἐμοὶ λοιδορεῖ Kal ὀνειδίζεις ταῦτα, 
ὧν πάντας μᾶλλον αἰτίους εὑρήσεις. 

Πολλὰ καὶ καλὰ καὶ μεγάλα ἢ πόλις, Αἰσχίνη, καὶ 
προείλετο καὶ κατώρθωσε δι ἐμοῦ, ὧν οὐκ ἡμνημόνησεν. 
σημεῖον δέ χειροτονῶν γὰρ ὁ δῆμος τὸν ἐροῦντ᾽ ἐπὶ τοῖς 
τετελευτηκόσι παρ᾽ αὐτὰ τὰ συμβάντα οὐ σὲ ἐχειροτόνησεν 

ὕὔ v4 y + 5 Ἂν , y¥ 
προβληθέντα, καίπερ εὔφωνον ὄντα, οὐδὲ Δημάδην, αρτι 

4 Ν 5 , 5 > ε 4 5 > ¥ ε lanl 
πεποιηκότα τὴν εἰρήνην, Ovo Hynpova, οὐδ᾽ ἄλλον ὑμῶν 


οὐδένα, ἀλλ᾽ ἐμέ. 


9. λοιδορεῖ Σ ; λοιδορεῖς Y ; λοιδορῇ vulg. 10. 
εὑρήσεις ἢ ἐμέ vulg.; ἢ ἐμὲ om. 2, LI. 


εν 


§ 285. 1. πολλὰ καλὰ Ο. 2. 


κατόρθωσε, ἐμνημόνησεν Ο. 4. 


καὶ παρελθόντος σοῦ καὶ Πυθοκλέους 


μᾶλλον αἰτίας Ο ; αἰτίους μᾶλλον 


τελευτηκόσι 


O. σὲ vulg., Bk., Dind., West., Lips.; σ᾽ ἐχειροτόνησεν Σ, Vom., Bl. (see Schaef. 


App.). 6. “Hyeudva L, At. 


10. πάντας μᾶλλον, i.e. any rather 
than myselif: most MSs. add the implied 
ἢ ἐμέ. 

§ 285. 1. πολλὰ καὶ καλὰ κ.τ.λ.: 
these accusatives are direct objects of 
προείλετο, but probably cognate with 
κατώρθωσε. Demosth. invariably uses 
κατορθῶ in its neuter sense of szcceed, 
as in 11. 20, ἐπισκοτεῖ τούτοις TO κατορθοῦν, 
and Cor. ὃ 274°, οὐ κατώρθωσε. If an 
object is added, as in XXI. τού, εἰ yap ὃν 
wy ἐπεβούλευσε κατώρθωσεν, it is cognate: 
ees i¥, 7, XXXVI0, 2, Soin Cor. § 290°, 
τοῦ κατορθοῦν τοὺς ἀγωνιζομένους is not 
causing the combatants to succeed (as L. 
and 5, give it), but the success of the 
combatants, aS in πάντα κατορθοῦν, fo 
succeed in all things, just preceding. The 
active use of κατορθῶ elsewhere is well 
known, as in Soph. El. 416, κατώρθωσαν 
βροτούς. 

3. τὸν ἐροῦντ᾽, i.e. the orator for the 
public funeral. The funeral eulogy on 
those who fell in battle was first intro- 
duced (acc. to Diod. ΧΙ. 33) in the 
Persian wars. We have one genuine 
ἐπιτάφιος λόγος, that of Hyperides in 
honour of those who fell in the Lamian 
War (322 B.C.); the famous eulogy of 


_ Pericles in 430 B.C., given in the words 


of Thucydides (11. 35—46), with one 
in Plat. Menex. (236—249), sportively 
ascribed to Aspasia by Socrates. The 


one ascribed to Lysias (11.) is of doubtful 
authenticity, and that found among the 
speeches of Demosthenes (LX.) is certainly 
spurious. 

4. παρ᾽ αὐτὰ τὰ συμβάντα : i.e. when 
there might have been a strong public 
prejudice against him, as a leader who 
had failed (cf. § 2489). 

5. προβληθέντα, sominated: cf. ὃ 149°. 
Demosth. here agrees with Thuc. 11. 34”, 
ἡἠρημένος ὑπὸ τῆς πόλεως, in making the 
people elect the orator; but Plat. Menex. 
234 B represents the Senate as the elect- 
ing body, which perhaps refers only to a 
nomination by the Senate of several 
candidates from whom the Assembly 
chose one.—Anpadnv: see note on ὃ 282? 
and Hist. § 81. 

6. ‘Hyrpova, mentioned by Aeschines 
(III. 25): he belonged to the Macedonian 
party at Athens with Demades and Py- 
thocles. Phocion, Hegemon, Pythocles, 
and others were put to death by vote of 
the Athenian Assembly in 317 B.c. (Plut. 
Phoc. 33—35). See Grote XII. Ch. 96, 
p- 479. For the partizanship of Pythocles 
with Philip in 343 B.C. see XIX. 225, 314 
(ἴσα βαίνων ἸΤυθοκλεῖ) : see Schaefer 11. 
312. 

7. παρελθόντος before σοῦ καὶ Πυθο- 
κλέους, but κατηγορούντων after these 
words. 


IO 


285 


200 


3 A XS la) SS a) Ν Ἂς Ν , 3 A ᾿ 
ωμως και ἀναιδῶς, ω Zev και θεοὶ, και κατηγορουντῶν εμουν 32 

»ν29 A Ν \ \ Ν ͵ὕ y> ¥ 3 [ 
ταῦθ α Και συ νυνι και λοιδορουμένων, €T αμεινον EXELpO- f 


286 τόνησέν με. 
σοι κἀγώ. 


προθυμίαν μεθ᾽ ἧς τὰ πράγματ᾽ ἔπραττον, καὶ τὴν ὑμετέραν 
ἀδικίαν: ἃ γὰρ εὐθενούντων τῶν πραγμάτων ἠρνεῖσθε διο- 
5 μνύμενοι, ταῦτ᾽ ἐν οἷς ἔπταισεν ἡ πόλις ὡμολογήσατε. τοὺς 
οὖν ἐπὶ τοῖς κοινοῖς ἀτυχήμασιν ὧν ἐφρόνουν λαβόντας 
Ν 3 Ν Ν Ν \ ΨΩ Ε 4 ε ~ 
ἄδειαν ἐχθροὺς μὲν πάλαι, φανεροὺς δὲ τόθ᾽ ἡγήσαντο αὑτοῖς 
χὰ > Ν ὔ ε ’, ἧς 

287 γεγενῆσθαι: εἶτα καὶ προσήκειν [ὑπολαμβάνοντες] τὸν 
ἐροῦντ᾽ ἐπὶ τοῖς τετελευτηκόσι καὶ τὴν ἐκείνων ἀρετὴν κοσ- 
μήσοντα μήθ᾽ ὁμωρόφιον μήθ᾽ ὁμόσπονδον γεγενημένον 
εἶναι τοῖς πρὸς ἐκείνους παραταξαμένοις, μηδ᾽ ἐκεῖ μὲν 


8. ὁμώς V6. 9- 


Lips.; ταῦθ᾽ West., BI. καὶ (before σὺ) om. V6. to. ped, L; ἐμέ vulg. 

8 286. 2. καὶ ἐγώΣ, L. οὗτοι At. 2. 4. εὐθυνόντων O; εὑρεθέντων V6. 
7. αυτοις Σ; αὐτοῖς L, vulg. 

§ 287. 1. ὑπολαμβάνοντες Σ, L, F, Φ, in[ ] Bl.; ὑπελάμβανον vulg.; ὑπέλαβον 
Y, A2. 2. ἐροῦντα Σ,1,, At. 2; ἐροῦντα τότ᾽ vulg. 3. μηδ᾽ (for rst μήθ᾽) 
At. ὁμωρόριον 1... 4. παραταξαμ (ους above) L?. 


9. ἃ καὶ σὺ νυνὶ, i.e. τυλζελ you again 
(καὶ) xow charge me with.—eér’ ἄμεινον, all 
the more eagerly: acc. to Bl. not elsewhere 
found in this sense. 

§ 286. 2. αὐτοὶ, of themselves (with- 
out being told). 

4. ἃ γαὰρ.. ὡμολογήσατε repeats for 
the whole Macedonian party what was 
said of Aeschines in 88 282, 283. For 
διομνύμενοι see ὃ 2835, 

5. τοὺς. λαβόντας ἄδειαν, i.e. chose 
who gained license to speak their minds 
with tmpunity, etc. See 88 198, 2637. 
ἄδεια is now used in Athens for an 
ordinary permit, e.g. to visit the Acro- 
polis by moonlight. 

§ 287. 1. εἶτα kal προσήκειν : sc. 
ἡγήσαντο (from § 286’). I bracket ὑπο- 
λαμβάνοντες with Blass: a mere careless- 
ness in style, aiming at no rhetorical 
effect, seems inadmissible in ¢4zs oration : 
see note on § 317% See critical note 

(above). 

3. ὁμωρόφιον : to be wuder the same 


AHMOZOENOY> 


Ν 3 » 5 3 ~ \ 9 Ν / 
τὸ δ᾽ αἴτιον οὐκ ἀγνοεῖς μὲν, ὅμως δὲ φράσω 
ΒΟ / > "ὃ > \ td τ. ¥ ΝῊ 
ἀμφότερ ηδεσαν αὐτοὶ, τήν τ ἐμὴν εὐνοιαν καὶ 


ταῦτα x, L, vulg.; ταὐτὰ B? (see Schaef. App.), Bk., Dind., 


Ι 


roof with anyone had a peculiar signifi- 
cance to the Greeks. Trials for homicide 
were held in the open air that neither 
the judges nor the prosecutor (usually 
a relative) might be under the same roof 
with the accused. See Ant. v. 11; and 
cf. Dem. xx. 158, and Plat. Rep. 417 A, 
where the ruling class are forbidden to_ 
go under the same roof with gold or 
silver.—yeyevnpévov εἶναι, not a mere 
pleonasm for γεγενῆσθαι, but expressing — 
more forcibly the combination of pastand 
future which is often seen in γεγενῆσθαι 
(M. T. 102, 109), 1.6. they thought he ~ 
should not be one who had been under the 
same roof, etc. 

4. παραταξαμένοις : see ὃ 2084, and 
note on συμπαραταξάμενοι, § 2164.—éxet 
kwpatew: the veve//ing in Philip’s camp — 
after the victory at Chaeronea was no-— 
torious. See Plut. Dem. 20, where the 
story is told of the drunken Philip rushing 
out among the slain and chanting the 


| 
| 
introductory words of the decrees of 


ΠΕΡΙ TOY STEbANOY 201 


/ \ / ae ~ la ε , ; ἴω 
κωμάζειν καὶ παιωνίζειν ἐπὶ ταῖς τῶν “Ἑλλήνων συμφοραῖς 
Ἂς ων > 4 ἴω ᾽ὔ A > 5 / FN 
μετὰ τῶν αὐτοχείρων τοῦ φόνου, δεῦρο δ᾽ ἐλθόντα τιμᾶσθαι, 
μηδὲ τῇ φωνῇ δακρύειν ὑποκρινόμενον τὴν ἐκείνων τύχην, 
ἀλλὰ τῇ ψυχῇ συναλγεῖν. τοῦτο δ᾽ ἑώρων Tap ἑαυτοῖς καὶ 
3, Ν > lal 
Tap ἐμοὶ, παρὰ δ᾽ ὑμῖν ov. 
καὶ οὐχ ὑμᾶς. 


διὰ ταῦτ᾽ ἔμ᾽ ἐχειροτόνησαν 
καὶ οὐχ ὁ μὲν δῆμος οὕτως, οἱ δὲ τῶν 
,ὔ , \ 5 \ e ε \ Ὺ΄Ὺὰ , 7 > 
τετελευτηκότων πατέρες καὶ ἀδελφοὶ οἵ ὑπὸ τοῦ δήμου τόθ 
ε 4 5 "Ὁ \ \ », 5 Ἂν , ἊΝ 
αἱρεθέντες ἐπὶ τὰς ταφὰς ἀλλως πως" ἀλλὰ δέον ποιεῖν 
αὐτοὺς τὸ περίδειπνον ὡς παρ᾽ οἰκειοτάτῳ τῶν τετελευτηκότων, 


5. παιωνίζειν >, L, F, Y, Ar; παιανίζειν vulg. 6. 
om. V6; δεῦρ᾽ Σ', Vom. 
7. poe Z, L}, Ar. 2, B; καὶ μηδὲ vulg. 


δεῦρο δ᾽ L, =, vulg., δ᾽ 
ἐλθόντα Σ, 1.1 (Ὁ), Ar. 2; ἐλθόντας vulg. (see 7). 


Vom. (cf. 6). 8. 


ὃ 288. 2. τελευτηκότων O. 


Demosthenes, which make an_ iambic 
tetrameter: παραυτίκα... ἐπὶ τῇ νίκῃ διὰ 
τὴν χαρὰν ἐξυβρίσας, καὶ κωμάσας ἐπὶ 
τοὺς νεκροὺς μεθύων, ἦδε τὴν ἀρχὴν τοῦ 
Δημοσθένους Ψηφίσματος πρὸς πόδα διαιρῶν 
καὶ ὑποκρούων, Δημοσθένης Δημοσθέ- 
νους Παιανιεὺς τάδ᾽ εἶπεν. Theo- 
pompus, frag. 262, relates that Philip 
invited the Athenian envoys to supper, 
and after they had withdrawn spent 
the night in a drunken revel with com- 
panions of both sexes until daybreak, 
when he dismissed these and rushed in 
upon the Athenians in their lodgings 
(ἐκώμαζεν ws τοὺς mpéoBers). Schaefer, 
III. 25, quotes an anonymous address to 
Demades in Herodian. oxnu. (VIII. 602 
W.): od μὲν yap ἔλαβες, Anuddn, δῶρα παρὰ 
Φιλίππου, ἐγὼ δὲ οὐκ ἔλαβον" καὶ od μὲν 
συνέπινες αὐτῷ κατὰ τῆς πόλεως εὐωχου- 
μένῳ, ἐγὼ δὲ οὐ συνέπινον" καὶ σὺ μὲν συνη- 
νέχθης τοῖς ἐκείνου πρέσβεσι συνομνύμενος 
(Sauppe σεμνυνόμενος), ἐγὼ δὲ οὐ συνη- 
νέχθην. See ΧΙΧ. 128, where Aeschines 
is charged with joining familiarly in the 
festivities held by Philip after the destruc- 
tion of the Phocians (see Hist. ὃ 48). It 
is fair to give Plutarch’s addition to his 
account in Dem. 20 (quoted above): 
ἐκνήψας δὲ καὶ TO μέγεθος τοῦ περιστάντος 
αὐτὸν ἀγῶνος ἐν νῷ λαβὼν, ἔφριττε τὴν 
δεινότητα καὶ τὴν δύναμιν τοῦ ῥήτορος, ἐν 


καὶ παρ᾽ ἑαυτοῖς Ο. 


oi (before ὑπὸ) Σ, L; om. vulg. 
4- οἰκιοτάτῳ (€ over t) D; οἰκειοτάτων Y}, 


ὑποκρινόμενον At; ὑποκρινομένους Σ, L, 
᾽ A ri 
9. παρ᾽ ὑμῖν δ᾽ οὔ Az. 
τόθ᾽ om. V6. 


τῶν om. O, Y. τετελευκότων O. 


μέρει μικρῷ μιᾶς ἡμέρας τὸν ὑπὲρ τῆς 
ἡγεμονίας καὶ τοῦ σώματος ἀναρρῖψαι κίν- 
δυνον ἀναγκασθεὶς ὑπ᾽ αὐτοῦ. 

6. τῶν αὐτοχείρων : αὐτόχειρ is pro- 
perly one who commits any deed ὅν “zs 
own hands or by his own act, as in XXI. 
60, τῆς ἀσελγείας ταύτης αὐτόχειρ, and 
Soph. Ant. 306, τὸν αὐτόχειρα τοῦδε τοῦ 
τάφου. It also, when φόνου is easily 
understood, means a murderer, as in 
XXI. 116, τὸν αὐτόχειρα ἔχοντες, like 
avdévrns, cf. Eur. H. F. 1359, matdwv 
αὐθέντην ἐμῶν. 

7. τῇ φωνῇ δακρύειν : a strong meta- 
phor, opposed to τῇ ψυχῇ συναλγεῖν (8). 
--ὑποκρινόμενον, δε a play-actor: cf. 
ὑποκρίνεται, he plays his part, ὃ 154.— 
τὴν τυχὴν : Object of δακρύειν. Bl. takes 
it with ὑποκρινόμενον, as in XIX. 246, 
᾿Αντιγόνην ὑποκέκριται. 

Io. ὑμᾶς, ie. any one of you: cf. 
ὑμῶν, § 285%. 

§ 288. I. οὐχ, negativing the two 
clauses with μὲν and δὲ: cf. § 13)", and 
the grand climax in § 179, with notes. 

2. πατέρες Kal ἀδελφοὶ: the public 
funeral was in charge of a committee of 
relatives of those who had fallen, chosen 
by the people. 

4. τὸ περίδειπνον, che funeral banguet : 
see Hermann (Bliimner), Gr. Priv. Ant. 
§ 39 (p. 371); Smith, Dict. Ant. under 


288 


(“292 


ν »» 3 » / . aS 5 4 3 > 4 

᾿ς ὥσπερ TAAN εἴωθε γίγνεσθαι, τοῦτ᾽ ἐποίησαν Tap ἐμοί. 
gy an A 43 

εἰκότως" [γένει μὲν yap ἕκαστος ἑκάστῳ μᾶλλον οἰκεῖος ἣν 
“ἐμοῦ, κοινῇ δὲ πᾶσιν οὐδεὶς ἐγγυτέρω" ᾧ γὰρ ἐκείνους 
σωθῆναι καὶ ᾿κατορθῶσαι μάλιστα διέφερεν, οὗτος καὶ 32 

/ a 4 > A sa ε οἷ ε ’, tA ~ 

παθόντων ἃ μήποτ᾽ ὠφελον τῆς ὑπὲρ ἁπάντων λύπης πλεῖστον 


10 μετεῖχεν. 
289 


ε ͵7ὔ 5 “ > yg Ψ 5 ἴω 5 , A > 3 ““ 

ἢ πόλις αὐτοῖς ἐπιγράψαι, ἵν εἰδῇς, Αἰσχίνη, καὶ ἐν αὑτῷ 
͵7ὔ Ν >» Ν ΄' 

τούτῳ σαυτὸν ἀγνώμονα καὶ συκοφάντην ὄντα καὶ μιαρόν. 


λέγε. 


5. εἰώθει Y. ne 

ὃ 289. 1. αὐτὸ (for αὐτῷ) A2. 
πόλις προείλετο V6 (mg.). 
καὶ συκοφ. ὄντα Y. 


in V6, added in mg.) 


The Epigram is omitted in 2, Ar, V6; also in text of L, added in margin. 


AHMOZOENOY2 


Aé δ᾽ 3 a \ Ν Fk ἃ ὃ , (λεθ᾽ 
eye QUT TOUTL TO επιγράμμα, O ἡμοσιᾳῳ TT Poel ce 


yap τὸ vulg.; Τὸ om. 2, L, B. 


τοὐυτὶ =, L, B, Ar. 23 τοῦτο vulg. si ie 
ἴδῃς V6 (mg.). 


ὄντα μιαρόν O. 


9. τῶν παθόντων Νό. 


3. αὑτὸν (for σαυτὸν) Y. ὄντα 
(ὃ δημοσίᾳ...λέγε, lines 1—4, omitted 


Funus; Cic. Leg. 11. 25.—@s παρ᾽ οἰκειο- 
τάτῳ, at the house of him who stood in the 
closest possible relation to the deceased, as 
at private funerals ¢he nearest relative. 
ws belongs to οἰκειοτάτῳ, in the usual in- 
tensive sense: cf. § 246’, ws εἰς ἐλάχιστα. 

5. ὥσπερ... γίγνεσθαι, 1.6. as is the 
custom at private funerals, referring to ws 
map οἰκειοτάτῳ (West.)—étrotynoay: like 
ποιεῖν in 3. 

7. ᾧ... διέφερεν, i.e. who had most at 
stake, i.e. in their success. 

8. καί (end), Zkew7se, with παθόντων 
.. ὄφελον. 

9. ἃ μήποτ᾽ ddedov (sc. παθεῖν), lit. 
which would they had never suffered: this 
rather poetic form of an unattained wish 
is used here for animation, and again in 
S320°.) See MoT. 1734, 720: 

$289. τ. δημοσίᾳ, with ἐπιγράψαι. 
---προείλεθ᾽ ἡ πόλις, more formal than 
the usual ἔδοξε τῇ πόλει, perhaps implying 
(as H. Jackson suggests) a choice from a 
number of epigrams sent in by competing 


poets. 
2. ἵν᾽’ edys...prapdv: explained in 
§ 290. 


EPIGRAM. This cannot be the genuine 
epitaph inscribed on the public monu- 
ment of the heroes of Chaeronea. This 


monument was standing on the road to 
the Academy in the time of Pausanias 
(I. 29, 13), and it is to be hoped that 
excavations may bring the real inscription 
to light. The present epigram, as most 
scholars have seen, has too little poetic 
merit and too slovenly a style to be ac- 
cepted as genuine. The spurious decrees 
and other documents in this oration, more- 
over, establish a presumption against any 
document which professes to have been 
read by the clerk and not by the orator. 
This epigram is not in the older Mss., 
and it appears in the Anthol. Graeca, III. 
Ρ. 314 (de Bosch), Iv. p. 249 (Jacobs). 
We can be sure of one genuine verse (9), 
which is quoted by Demosthenes in ὃ 2901 
(see note on this verse). A small frag-— 
ment of an inscription has been found 
near the Olympieum at Athens, cut (acc. 
to Kohler) between 350 and 300 B.C., 
which contains parts of six words of an 
epigram in the Anthol. Pal. vil. 245: this” 
epigram was evidently inscribed to the 
heroes of Chaeronea. See C. I. Att. 1. 
3, No. 1680. The full epigram is as 
follows, the letters found in the inscripti on 
being printed in heavy type :— i 
Ὦ χρόνε, παντοίων θνητοῖς πανεπίσκοπε 
δαῖμον, , 


ΠΕΡῚ TOY =TEbANOY 203 


EMITPAMMA. 


[Οἵδε πάτρας ἕνεκα σφετέρας εἰς δῆριν ἔθεντο 
oe . Ces 7 « 5) / 
ὅπλα, Kal ἀντιπάλων ὕβριν ἀπεσκέδασαν. 


μαρνάμενοι δ᾽ ἀρετῆς καὶ δείματος οὐκ ἐσάωσαν 
ψυχὰς ἀλλ᾽ ᾿Αἴδην κοινὸν ἔθεντο βραβῆ, 
οὕνεκεν “Ἑλλήνων, ὡς μὴ ζυγὸν αὐχένι θέντες (5) 
/ \ b] \ ” [τι 
δουλοσύνης στυγερὰν ἀμφὶς ἔχωσιν ὕβριν. 
γαῖα δὲ πατρὶς ἔχει κόλποις τῶν πλεῖστα καμόντων 


, b 2 \ al > X “ / 
σώματ᾽, ἐπεὶ θνητοῖς ἐκ Διὸς ἥδε κρίσις" 


a fal / la) 
μηδὲν ἁμαρτεῖν ἐστι θεῶν καὶ πάντα κατορθοῦν 


ἐν βιοτῇ" μοῖραν δ᾽ οὔ τι φυγεῖν ἔπορεν.] (10) 
EPIGRAM. v. 4. βράβην MSs., Bk.; βραβῆ Schneider. 9. θεῶν MSS. (see 


§ 2005). 


κατορθοῦν" L. 10. 


φεύγειν L, F, ®, Y. 


éropev L, vulg.; éropov O. 


λγγελος ἡμετέρων πᾶσι γενοῦ πάθεων 

Ὥς ἱερὰν σῴζειν πειρώμενοι Ἑλλάδα χώραν 

Βοιωτῶν κλεινοῖς θνήσκομεν ἐν δαπέδοις. 
This, though genuine, cannot, of course, 
be the inscription quoted by Demosthenes, 
as it does not have the verse’ μηδὲν... 
κατορθοῦν : but there were undoubtedly 
many epigrams commemorating the men 
of Chaeronea (cf. note on ὃ 289'). 

vy. 1. ἔθεντο ὅπλα, arrayed themselves 
(lit. placed their arms): cf. Plat. Kep. 
440 E, τίθεσθαι τὰ ὅπλα πρὸς τοῦ λογι- 
στικοῦ (of the θυμός), arrays ztself on the 
side of the reason; and Arist. Pol. Ath. 
829 ds ἂν στασιαζούσης THs πόλεως μὴ θῆται 
τὰ ὅπλα μηδὲ μεθ᾽ ἑτέρων, i.e. who takes 
sides with neither party. These examples 
are enough to show, if proof were still 
needed, that the old interpretation of 
τίθεσθαι ὅπλα (as in Thue. 11. 2, twice), 
to pile and stack arms (see Arnold’s note), 
is untenable, though it still lingers (see 
Lidd. and Scott). 

Ὁ. 2. ἀπεσκέδασαν, scattered, brought 
to nought: a patriotic exaggeration as ap- 
plied to Chaeronea, perhaps referring to 
some special exploits of the Athenians. 
Diod. (XVI. 86) says, μέχρι μέν τινος ὁ 
ἀγὼν ἀμφιδοξουμένας εἶχε Tas ἐλπίδας τῆς 
νίκης. Cf. Lycurgus (Leoc. 49), εἰ δὲ 
δεῖ καὶ παραδοξότατον μὲν εἰπεῖν ἀληθὲς δὲ, 
ἐκεῖνοι νικῶντες ἀπέθανον. 

U. 3. ἀρετῆς καὶ δείματος must depend 
on βραβῆ, by an hyperbaton which would 


be incredible in the genuine epitaph; οὐκ 
ἐσάωσαν ψυχὰς ἀλλ᾽ being introduced in 
place of a participial clause like οὐσώσαντες 
ψυχάς. The meaning evidently is, z7 the 
battle, while they sacrificed their lives, they 
left to the God of Death to judge whether 
they showed courage or fear. There is a 
similar Aypferbaton in Xen. Hell. vil. 3, 
7: ὑμεῖς τοὺς περὶ ᾿Αρχίαν καὶ ‘Lardrny,... 
οὐ ψῆφον ἀνεμείνατε, ἀλλ᾽ ὁπότε πρῶτον 
ἐδυνάσθητε ἐτιμωρήσασθε (West.). 

v. 5. οὕνεκεν ᾿Βἰιλλήνων belongs to 
VU. 3, 4.---:--υγὸν αὐχένι θέντες, a strange 
expression for classical times, but com- 
mon in later poetry, as in the Anthology 
(Blass). 

v. 6. ἀμφὶς ἔχωσιν (with μὴ), have 
about them, like a yoke: cf. Od. 111. 486, 
σεῖον ζυγὸν ἀμφὶς ἔχοντες. 

Ὁ. 7. τῶν πλεῖστα καμόντων, of men 
who most grievously laboured, referring to 
the defeat; to these words ἐπεί (v. 8) 
refers back. 

vv. 9, το. μηδὲν...ἐν βιοτῇ, zt zs the 
gift of the Gods (for men) never to fail 
and always to succeed in life, i.e. this is a 
miraculous exception in mortal life; op- 
posed to which is the fixed rule that death 
is appointed for all, potpay...éropev (sc. 
Ζεὺς Bporois). The two verses contain 
the ἐκ Διὸς κρίσις ; but the change of con- 
struction in μοῖραν... ἔπορεν is awkward, 
and ἐν βιοτῇ is always felt to be an un- 
natural addition to v.g. It isnow known 


eer ὦ remy 


204 AHMOZSOENOYS 


3 5 a 

290 ᾿Ακούεις, Αἰσχίνη, καὶ ἐν αὐτῷ τούτῳ μηδὲν ἁμαρτεῖν 
ἐστι θεῶν καὶ πάντα κατορθοῦν; οὐ τῷ συμβούλῳ τὴν 
~ ~ \ > A > / 4 5 Ν 
τοῦ κατορθοῦν τοὺς ἀγωνιζομένους ἀνέθηκε δύναμιν, ἀλλὰ 
τοῖς θεοῖς. τί οὖν, ὦ κατάρατ᾽, ἐμοὶ περὶ τούτων λοιδορεῖ, 

\ id a Ν \ a aa) ε \ ΄ 3 Ψ 
5 καὶ λέγεις ἃ σοὶ καὶ τοῖς σοῖς οἱ θεοὶ τρέψειαν εἰς κεφαλήν; 
291 Πολλὰ τοίνυν, ὦ ἄνδρες ᾿Αθηναῖοι, καὶ ἄλλα κατηγορη- 
κότος αὐτοῦ καὶ κατεψευσμένου, μάλιστ᾽ ἐθαύμασα πάντων. 


Ld la ΄ ΄, ‘al ᾽ Ν 3 ε x» 
ὅτε TOV συμβεβηκότων τότε TH πόλει μνησθεὶς οὐχ ὡς ἂν 


§ 290. |. 
ἐξαμαρτεῖν B. 2. 
κατορθῶν At. 
λοιδορεῖ Σ ; λοιδορῇ L, vulg. 5. 

ὃ 291. τ. κατηγοροῦντος V6. 
Ar; ἕν μάλιστα L, vulg. 
vulg.; ὅτι (ε over c) L. 


that the words μηδὲν ἁμαρτεῖν ἐστι θεοῦ 
(or θεῶν) καὶ πάντα κατορθοῦν are a verse 
of the epigram of Simonides on the heroes 
of Marathon, of which two other lines are 


preserved : 
Ἑλλήνων προμαχοῦντες ᾿Αθηναῖοι Mapa- 
θῶνι 
χρυσοφόρων Μήδων ἐστόρεσαν δύνα- 
μιν. 


See Kirchhoff (Hermes vi. 487---480) 
who quotes a Ms. scholium on Gregory 
Nanzianz. Or. in Julian. 11. p. 169 Ὁ: τὸ 
ἀναμάρτητον, φησὶν, ὑπὲρ ἡμᾶς τοὺς ἀνθρώ- 
Tous’ τὸ δὲ μικρόν τιπταίσαντας ἐπανάγεσθαί 
τε καὶ διορθοῦσθαι ἀνθρώπων ἐστὶν καλῶν τε 
κἀγαθῶν. λέγει δὲ Σιμωνίδης (εἷς δ᾽ οὗτος 
τῶν θ΄ λυρικῶν) ἐν ἐπιγράμματι ῥηθέντι 
αὐτῷ ἐπὶ τοῖς Μαραθῶνι πεσοῦσιν ᾿Αθη- 
ναίων τὸν στίχον τοῦτον, Μηδὲν ἁμαρτεῖν 
ἐστι θεοῦ καὶ παντὰ κατορθοῦν. See 
Bergk, Poet. Lyr., Simon. fr. 82, with 
the note. See Themist. Or. XXII. p. 276 RB, 
ἐπεὶ δὲ τὸ μηδὲν ἁμαρτάνειν ἔξω τῆς φύσεως 
κεῖται τῆς ἀνθρωπίνης, ...τὸ ἐπἔγραμμα ἀλη- 
θέστερον ὃ ᾿Αθήνησιν ἐπιγέγραπται ἐν τῷ 
τάφῳ τῷ δημοσίῳ: καὶ γὰρ τοῖς θεοῖς μόνοις 
τὸ πάντα κατορθοῦν ἀπονέμει. These 
two quotations refer beyond doubt to a 
verse in which ‘‘never to fail and always 
to succeed” is called a divine preroga- 


πάντων Σ, Ar; ἁπάντων L, vulg. ae 
μνησθεὶς X, L, At, B; ἀναμνησθεὶς vulg. 


ws τὸ (after τούτῳ) L, vulg.; om. = (erasure above the line), Ar. 
θεον (not θεου), changed to θεῶν, 2; θεών vulg.; θεοῦ Y, Ar. 
οὐ τῷ συμβ. THY τοῦ Kar. Σ (mg.), om. Zl. Ae 
οἱ θεοὶ om. L. 


ὦ om. Φ. 
εἰς τὴν κεφ. Β. 

μάλιστ᾽ Σ, 
ὅτε Z, Ars bre 


καταψευσαμένου O, V6. 


tive ; while it is also certain that in the 
same words in the inscription quoted by 
Demosthenes these are called a privilege 
sometimes granted by the Gods to favour- 
ed mortals (see § 290). The original verse 
of Simonides, μηδὲν... κατορθοῦν (with- 
out ἐν βιοτῇ), was probably used 152 years ~ 
after the battle of Marathon, as a well- 
known verse, in the genuine epigram 
on those who fell at Chaeronea, still 
without ἐν βιοτῇ, but with a different 
meaning; and in this new sense it was 
quoted by Demosthenes in § 290. The 
writer of the spurious epigram in § 289 
borrowed the genuine line (perhaps from 
the text of Demosthenes), and added the 
whole of v. 10. In v. Ὁ, as in § 290%, 
θεῶν has the best authority (see critical 
note). In the scholium on Greg. Nanz. 
we have θεοῦ, which Bergk thinks may 
be a Christian substitution for θεῶν. See 
notes of West. and Bl. 

§ 290. τ. μηδὲν... κατορθοῦν: see 
note on ὃ 280, wv. 9, Io. 

3. ἀνέθηκε: the epigram or its com- 
poser, or perhaps ἡ πόλι», is the subject. 

5. @...els κεφαλήν: cf. XIX. 130, ἃ νῦν 
els κεφαλὴν ὑμᾶς αὐτῷ det τρέψαι. 

ξ 291. 3. ὡς ἂν: sc. ἔσχε or σχοίη: 
cf. § 197’. a 


δ. ἐς se eS lM ee νὴ... Or 


, ΠΕΡΙ TOY ΣΤΕΦΑΝΟΥ 205 


y Ν δί Fe » Ν , ns 50 
εὔνους καὶ δίκαιος πολίτης ἔσχε τὴν γνώμην, οὐδ᾽ ἐδάκρυσεν, 
3. ο»ΨὮ» ΄“ 5 Ν a nw 5 ϑι. ιν" 4 Ν \ 
οὐδ᾽ ἔπαθε τοιοῦτον οὐδὲν TH ψυχῇ, GAN ἐπάρας THY φωνὴν 5 
323 καὶ γεγηθὼς καὶ λαρυγγίζων weTo μὲν ἐμοῦ κατηγορεῖν 
᾿ δηλονότι, δεῖγμα δ᾽ ἐξέφερε καθ᾽ ἑαυτοῦ ὅτι τοῖς γεγενημένοις 
καΐτοι τὸν τῶν 292 
, \ A ΄, , , ψ @ 
νόμων καὶ τῆς πολιτείας φάσκοντα φροντίζειν, ὠσπερ οὗτος 


\ Ἂ, 3 ἣν + lal 7 » ἴων 5 Ν lay 
νυνὶ, καὶ εἰ μηδὲν ἄλλο, τοῦτό y ἔχειν δεῖ, ταὐτὰ λυπεῖσθαι 


3 A > \ ε , 5» an ay 
ἀνιαροῖς οὐδὲν ὁμοίως ἔσχε τοῖς αλλοις. 


Ν Ν # ἴω ΄΄“ἌΟ nw wn 
καὶ ταὐτὰ χαίρειν τοῖς πολλοῖς, καὶ μὴ TH προαιρέσει τῶν 
κοινῶν ἐν τῷ τῶν ἐναντίων μέρει τετάχθαι: ὃ σὺ νυνὶ τ΄ = 
πεποιηκὼς εἶ φανερὸς, ἐμὲ πάντων αἴτιον καὶ δι᾿ ἐμὲ εἰς 
, , al la an 
πράγματα φάσκων ἐμπεσεῖν τὴν πόλιν, οὐκ ἀπὸ τῆς ἐμῆς 
i's 3 Ν τὰ 5 , e lant lanl y 
πολιτείας οὐδὲ προαιρέσεως ἀρξαμένων ὑμῶν τοῖς Ἕλλησι 
ῪΝἮῃ > Rd 3 > la) , ΞΕ “ ϑι 5 Nee Bek 
βοηθεῖν - ἐπεὶ ἔμοιγ᾽ εἰ τοῦτο δοθείη παρ᾽ ὑμῶν, dv ἐμὲ ὑμᾶς 298 
5 Lal la Ν ἊΜ“ ε lal 
ἡἠναντιῶσθαι τῇ κατὰ τῶν Ἑλλήνων ἀρχῇ πραττομένῃ, 


4. καὶ Z, L, At. 2; οὐδὲ vulg.. 5. τοιοῦτον οὐδὲν Σ, L, Ar; οὐδ. τοι. vulg.; 

οὐδὲν om. A2. 6. καὶ (before yey.) om. O. 7. δειγμα (¢ over εἰ) >. 

§ 292. 3. vy om. Ar. τὸ ταὐτὰ L, vulg.; τὸ om. Σ, Ar. 2 "5 Ταύτας ἡ 
ταῦτά ΑἸ. 5. τετάχθαι μέρει Α2. ὅσ (for 6 συν". νῦν Ο. 
6. φανερῶς 1.1, O. 

§ 293. 1. δοθείη δωρεὰ A2. τοσαῦτα 6¢ ἐμὲ vulg.; τοσαῦτα om. Σ, L!, 


res ¥. 


ὑμῶν ἐναντιῶσθαι A2. 


4. εὔνους : see note on ὃ 173“.--ἔσχε constitution. 

᾿ς τὴν γνώμην, was disposed. 3. ταὐτὰ... τοῖς πολλοῖς : οἵ. § 280%, 
6. λαρυγγίζων: see Harpocr., τὸ τὸ ταὐτὰ προαιρεῖσθαι κ.τ.λ. 
mative τὴν φωνὴν καὶ μὴ κατὰ φύσιν τῇ προαιρέσει τῶν κοινῶν; cf. 


φθέγγεσθαι, ἀλλ᾽ ἐπιτηδεύειν περιεργότερον § 192° and ]. 8 (below); see 88 93°, 

τῷ λάρυγγι χρῆσθαι οὕτως ἐλέγετο. Cf. 3177. 

a Ar. Eq. 358, λαρυγγιῶ τοὺς ῥήτορας, 7 δ. 
τς wil screech down the orators. τὴ 
7. Setypa ἐξέφερε, he was making an 

exhibition, giving a specimen: cf. XIX. 12. 


τετάχθαι, to be found ( posted). 

πράγματα, troubles: cf. Ar. Ach. 
310, ἁπάντων αἰτίους τῶν πραγμάτων. 
See Aesch. Ill. 57, τῶν δὲ ἀτυχημάτων 


-ὖτι.. τοῖς ἄλλοις: depending on the 
verbal force of δεῖγμα. A bazaar-in the 
Piraeus, where samples of goods (δείγ- 
para) were exhibited, was called the 
Δεῖγμα: see Harpocr.—rots yeyev. ἀνια- 
pots : causal dative with ἔσχε, was affected: 
cf. ἔσχε τὴν γνώμην (4). 

8. τοῖς ἄλλοις: with ὁμοίως. 

§ 292. 1. τῶν νόμων: Aeschines 
began his speech (1—8) with a grand 
glorification of the laws, and of the γραφὴ 
παρανόμων as the great bulwark of the 


ἁπάντων Δημοσθένην αἴτιον γεγενημένον. 
-οοὐκ.. βοηθεῖν: this suggests forcibly 
that the policy of Demosthenes of helping 
friendly states against Philip has followed 
the traditional policy of Athens: see §§ 95 
—100. Demosth. here only denies that 
he degan this policy (οὐκ ἀρξαμένων). 

§ 293. 2. τῇ... πραττομένῃ, the do- 
minion which was growing up: cf. § 62), 
and XXIII. 11, ὁ Κερσοβλέπτῃ πράττων 
τὴν ἀρχήν, the active form of ἡ mparro- 
μένη ἀρχή. 


206 AHMOZOENOY2 


an a nx» ΄ ; 
μείζων ἂν δοθείη δωρεὰ συμπασῶν ὧν τοῖς ἀλλοις δεδώκατε. 
= , N a ε κα 
ἀλλ᾽ οὔτ᾽ ἂν ἐγὼ ταῦτα φήσαιμι (ἀδικοίην γὰρ ἂν ὑμᾶς), 
κι > 5 yg a ,ὔ 3 5 4 
ς οὔτ᾽ ἂν ὑμεῖς εὖ 018 ὅτι συγχωρήσαιτε: οὗτός T εἰ δίκαια 
"Ὁ lal ie , ἴων 
ἐποίει, οὐκ ἂν ἕνεκα τῆς πρὸς ἐμὲ ἔχθρας τὰ μέγιστα τῶν 
ὑμετέρων καλῶν ἔβλαπτε καὶ διέβαλλεν. 
ἴω lanl an > yy 
294 ᾿Αλλὰ τί ταῦτ᾽ ἐπιτιμῶ, πολλῴ 'σχετλιώτερ ἄλλα κατη- 
ἴω ἃ Ν 5 ἴων 
γορηκότος αὐτοῦ καὶ κατεψευσμένου; ὃς γὰρ ἐμοῦ φιλιπ- 
> A an ae 9 Δ ad Bra 
πισμὸν, ὦ γῆ καὶ θεοὶ, κατηγορεῖ, τί οὗτος οὐκ ἂν εἰποι; 
, Ἂς Ν ε »Ἅ \ , θ Ἂς » > ἌΝ LA: θ ͵7ὔ 
καίτοι νὴ τὸν Ἡρακλέα καὶ πάντας θεοὺς, εἰ γ ἐπ᾿ ἀληθείας 
ἴω 3. 8» 
ς δέοι σκοπεῖσθαι, τὸ καταψεύδεσθαι καὶ du ἔχθραν τι λέγειν 
; χὰ a “ἡ 3 A 
ἀνελόντας ἐκ μέσου, τίνες ws ἀληθῶς εἰσιν ols ἂν εἰκότως 
σιν Γ΄ \ \ \ 
καὶ δικαίως τὴν TOV γεγενημένων αἰτίαν ἐπὶ τὴν κεφαλὴν 
A ς 4 ΓΦ Ψ A 
ἀναθεῖεν ἅπαντες, τοὺς ὁμοίους τούτῳ παρ ἑκάστῃ TOV 324 
/ YY > ON 5 Ν .5 / ἃ ψι > οὶ > θ me ἡ ας 
295 πόλεων εὑροιτ ἂν, OV τοὺς ἐμοι" οἱ, OT HY ἀσυενὴ TA 
\ ἴω Ν / ‘ / 
Φιλίππου πράγματα Kat κομιδῇ μικρὰ, πολλάκις προλέγόν- 
ἴω Ν Ἂς / 
των ἡμῶν καὶ παρακαλούντων καὶ διδασκόντων τὰ βέλτιστα, 
΄΄ὦ 9 Ν “A Ve &d 
τῆς ἰδίας ἕνεκ᾽ αἰσχροκερδίας τὰ κοινῇ συμφέροντα προΐεντο, 


3. μεῖζον L. ἐμοὶ over ἂν B. ἁπασῶν A2. τοῖς om. Δ 2. 4: ταῦ 
om. A2. av (after yap) om. O. συγχωρήσετε AL; συγχωρήσητ᾽ εὖ old ὅτι 
A2. τὰ δίκαια At. 2. 6. πρός με Al. 

8 294. 1. ἐπιτιμώ Σ᾿, ἐπειτιμῷ =. 2. καταψευσαμένου V6. 4 Kal 

for καί Tot) ®. πάντας =, L, Y, Ar; πάντας τοὺς vulg. 5. κατεψεῦσθαι A’. 

6. ἀνελόντες V6. 9. εὕροιτ᾽ ἂν Σ, Y, F (yp), Ar; εὕροι τις ἂν L, B, vulg. οὐ 

z, ΓΑΙ 2; ovxl L, vulg. τοῖς ἐμοί ®. a | 
8 295. 4. ἕνεκεν L. αἰσχροκερδίας X, L; -elas vulg. z 


5. εὖ οἶδ᾽ ὅτι, as usual, parenthetic: 
οἵδ᾽ ὅτι can be thus used even with a 
participle, as in IX. I, XIX. 9. 

7. ἔβλαπτε kal διέβαλλεν (with av): 
conative. 

In §$ 294—296 Demosthenes gives 
a ‘‘black list” of the traitors who have 
helped Philip or Alexander in subjugating 
Greek states, and declares that Aeschines 
is the representative of this pestilent class 
in Athens. Saving his own country from 
the disgrace of joining or abetting this 
foul plot against liberty is the great service 
for which he claims the name of patriot. 

8 294. 2. ἐμοῦ φιλιππισμὸν : the 
pronoun is emphatic, me, of all men. The 
word Philippic in all languages is a stand- 


ing answer to the charge of Aeschines. 

6. ἀνελόντας ἐκ μέσου, discarding: 
cf: XLVeuaas 

8. dvabetev: cf. § 290°. 

9. εὕροιτ᾽ (εὕροιτε) ἄν, you would find, 
appealing suddenly to the court or the 
audience: we must understand ὑμᾶς with 
ἀνελόντας (6). The other reading, εὕροι 
τις ἄν, would involve a change from the 


plural ἀνελόντας (sc. twas) to the more © 


explicit singular with τις. 
§ 295. I. 


state described in 11. 14-.ὁ 21.---τὰ ®. 
πράγματα, i.e. Ais condition. 

2. προλεγόντων... τὰ βέλτιστα, as in 
the Olynthiacs and the First Philippic. 


ὅτ᾽ ἦν ἀσθενῆ, i.e. in the 


ΠΕΡΙ TOY ΣΤΕΦΑΝΟΥ 207 


᾿ : Ν ε , ν , 5 ἴω \ 4 
TOUS ὑπάρχοντας ἕκαστοι πολίτας ἐξαπατῶντες Kal διαφθεί- 5 
ν 4 > - Ν / , 
povtes, ews δούλους ἐποίησαν,---Θετταλοὺς Adoyos, Κινέας, 
Θρασύδαος: ᾿Αρκάδας Κερκιδᾶς, Ἱερώνυμος, Evxapridas: “- 
᾿Αργείους Μύρτις, Τελέδαμος, Μνασέας: ᾿Ηλείους Ἐὐξίθεος, 
Κλεότιμος, ᾿Αρίσταινχμος: Μεσσηνίους οἱ Φιλιάδου τοῦ 
μος, ᾿Αρίσταιχμ ἢ 
θεοῖς ἐνθροῦ παῖδες Νέων καὶ Θρασύλοχος: Σικυωνίους to 
ἐχύρ ρ X 
3 ,ὕ Ψ , , , , 
Aptotpatos, Emyapys: Κορινθίους Δείναρχος, Δημάρετος" 
Μεγαρέας Πτοιόδωρος, Ἕλιξος, Πέριλλος: Θηβαίους Τιμόλας, 
Θεογείτων, ᾿Ανεμοίτας: Εὐβοέας Ἵππαρχος, Κλείταρχος, 
Σωσίστρατος. ἐπιλείψει με λέγονθ᾽ ἡ ἡμέρα τὰ τῶν προ- 296 
ρ με λέγονθ᾽ ἡ ἡμέρ ρ 


las 204s aq ΄ 5: τὸς 4 > A A 
δοτῶν ονοματα. OUTOL ταντες ELOLY, ἄνδρες Αθηναῖοι, TMV 


7: Θρασύδαος Σ, L, Art; Θρασύδαιος vulg.; Θρασύλαος Y, F (yp), At (corr.). 


7 


y ξ Poem oe 


Κερκιδᾶς vulg., Polyb.; Kepxidas 2; Kepxidas Li, Φ, Ar; Κερκιδὰς 1,3. Εὐκαμπίδας 
2, L, Ar, Y; om. V6; Evxadmidas vulg. 11. Alvapxos =}. 12. ILeplados 
=, L; Πέριλλος Y, F (yp), Phot.; Περίλλος Harpocr., Suid.; Περίλλαος Ar; om. Az. 
(See § 48°.) Tiwdras 2, L, Polyb.; Τιμόλαος vulg. (See § 48°.) 13. Kyeb- 


Tapxos om. A2. 
§ 296. I. 


5. τοὺς ὑπάρχοντας πολίτας, ¢hezr 
own fellow-citizens, those with whom 
each was concerned or had to deal: see 
note on ὃ 1°. Most of the traitors in the 
following list have been rewarded by de- 


served obscurity; those who would rescue 


them from this may consult Dissen’s, 
Westermann’s, and Blass’s collections of 
the scanty knowledge of them found else- 
where. I give a few references. Daochus 
and Thrasydaus were the Thessalian 
ambassadors sent by Philip to Thebes 
in 339 B.C. (see note on § 211°). See 
Plut. Dem. 18. Theopompus (Athen. vI. 
p- 249 C) calls Thrasydaus μικρὸν μὲν 
τὴν γνώμην, κόλακα δὲ μέγιστον. Hiero- 
nymus is mentioned in XIX. 11; and in 
the Scholia as a pupil of Isocrates. The 
sons of Philiades are mentioned in [XvVII.] 
4—7, as restored to power in Messene by 
Alexander after they had. been expelled 
‘by a popular revolution. Perillus and 
Ptoeodorus are mentioned in XIX. 295; 
and Perillus, Timolaus, and Aristratus in 
§ 48 (above). Hipparchus and Clitarchus 
were set up as tyrants in Eretria by Philip 
about 343 B.C.: see IX. 57, 58, and §§ 71, 


ἐπιλίψει (t changed to εἰ) 2; ἐπιλείψαι Al. 2. 


ὦ ἄνδρες VO. 


80, and 81 (above). Many of the names 
are found in Harpocration and Suidas. 
With this whole passage compare §§ 45— 
49,and Polyb. Xvil.14. Polybius censures 
Demosthenes for calling some of these 
men traitors, especially the Arcadians 
and Messenians, maintaining that they 
did what they believed to be for the best 
interest of their own states. He says: 
εἰ δὲ τηροῦντες τὰ πρὸς Tas πατρίδας δίκαια 
κρίσει πραγμάτων διεφέροντο, νομίζοντες οὐ 
ταὐτὸ συμφέρον ᾿Αθηναίοις εἶναι καὶ ταῖς 
ἑαυτῶν πόλεσιν, οὐ δή που διὰ τοῦτο καλεῖ- 
σθαι προδότας ἐχρῆν ὑπὸ Δημοσθένους. See 
the whole essay on traitors, Polyb. XVII. 
13—15. Demosthenes, looking back on 
his long struggle with Philip, felt that 
this selfish regard for the temporary 
interests of special cities, which always 
proved fatal to Hellenic unity, and this 
utter disregard of the good of Greece as 
a whole, really amounted to treachery. 

8 296. τ. émdcher...dvdopara: em- 
phatic asyndeton. Cf. the Epistle to the 
Hebrews, xi. 32, ἐπιλείψει με ὁ χρόνος, 
and Cic. Nat. Deor. III. 32 (81), dies. 
deficiat si velim numerare. 


5 


IO 


208 AHMOZOENOY2 


αὐτῶν βουλευμάτων ἐν ταῖς αὑτῶν πατρίσιν ὧνπερ οὗτοι 
παρ᾽ ὑμῖν, arb pero. μιαροὶ καὶ κόλακες καὶ ἀλάστορες, 
ἠκρωτηριασμένοι τὰς ἑαυτῶν ἕκαστοι πατρίδας, τὴν ἐλευ- 
θερίαν προπεπωκότες πρότερον μὲν Φιλίππῳ νῦν δ᾽ ᾿Αλεξ- 
ἄνδρῳ, τῇ γαστρὶ μετροῦντες καὶ τοῖς αἰσχίστοις τὴν 
εὐδαιμονίαν, τὴν δ᾽ ἐλευθερίαν καὶ τὸ μηδέν᾽ ἔχειν δεσπότην 
αὑτῶν, ἃ τοῖς προτέροις Ἕλλησιν ὅροι τῶν ἀγαθῶν ἦσαν 


Ν 7 5 ,ὔ 
καὶ κανόνες, ἀνατετροφότες. 


4. ταῖς αὑτῶν V6; ταῖς αὐτῶν Σ. L, vulg. 9: 
ἀνατετροφότες vulg.; ἀνατετραφότες Σ, Bk.; 


πρότερον At. ΤΟ. 
and -τρο- L. 


2. τῶν αὐτῶν βουλευμάτων, (men) of 
the same purposes: this genitive of quality 
is as rare in Greek as it is common in 
Latin. See Aesch. III. 168, θεωρήσατ᾽ 
αὐτὸν, μὴ ὁποτέρου τοῦ λόγου ἀλλ᾽ ὁπο- 
τέρου τοῦ βίου ἐστίν, and Thuc. Ill. 45”, 
ἁπλῶς τε ἀδύνατον καὶ πολλῆς εὐηθειας. 
Kriiger (Spr. 47, 6, 10) and West. call 
these possessive genitives; and Weil 
quotes IX. 56, τινὲς μὲν Φιλίππου... τινὲς 
δὲ τοῦ βελτίστου, which, however, is not 
the same thing. 

4. ἀλάστορες, accursed wretches (ap- 
plied to Philip in ΧΙΧ. 305); properly 
victims of divine vengeance, as in Soph. 
Aj. 374, μεθῆκα τοὺς ἀλάστορας, the 
primary meaning (probably) being a 
divine avenger, as in Aeschyl. Pers. 354, 
φανεὶς ἀλάστωρ ἢ κακὸς δαίμων. 

5. ἠκρωτηριασμένοι, who have out- 
raged (lit. mutilated): see Harpocr., ἀντὶ 
τοῦ λελυμασμένοι" οἱ yap λυμαινόμενοί 
τισιν εἰώθασι περικόπτειν αὐτῶν τὰ ἄκρα. 
In Aeschyl. Cho. 439 and Soph. El. 445 
there is the same idea in ἐμασχαλίσθη, 
μασχαλίζω being to mutilate a dead body 
by cutting off the extremities (τὰ ἄκρα) 
and putting them under the armpits 
(μασχάλαι) : see Kittredge on Armpitting 
among the Greeks, Am. Journ. of Philol. 
VI. pp. 151—169. Perhaps such strong 
metaphors as this suggested to Aeschines 
the absurd expressions which he pretends 
to quote from Demosthenes in III. 166, 
ἀμπελουργοῦσί τινες τὴν πόλιν, ἀνατετμή- 


αὑτῶν L, vulg.; avrwy 2. 
both -rpa- 


κασί τινες τὰ κλήματα τὰ TOU δήμου, 


and others. See Dems το 
ἐκνενευρισμένοι Kal περιῃρημένοι χρήματα 
K.T.\.—THV ἐλευθερίαν προπεπωκότες : for 
the successive steps by which προπίνω 
comes to mean recklessly sacrifice, see 
Lidd. and Scott: cf. 111. 22. An inter- 
mediate meaning, present a cup (or other 
gift) after drinking one’s health, is seen 
ἴῃ XIX. 139, πίνων καὶ φιλανθρωπευόμενος 
πρὸς αὐτοὺς ὁ Φίλιππος ἄλλα τε δὴ πολλὰ, 
οἷον αἰχμάλωτα καὶ τὰ τοιαῦτα, καὶ τελευ- 
τῶν ἐκπώματ᾽ ἀργυρᾷ καὶ χρυσὰ προὔπινεν 


αὐτοῖς, i.e. in drinking their health, he 


gave them these various gifts. See also 
Pind. Ol. vil. 1—6, φιάλαν ὡς εἴ τις 
ἀφνειᾶς ἀπὸ χειρὸς ἑλὼν ἔνδον ἀμπέλου 
καχλάζοισαν δρόσῳ δωρήσεται νεανίᾳ 
γαμβρῷ προπίνων οἴκοθεν οἴκαδε, K.T.d., 
and the Schol. on v. 5, προπίνειν ἐστὶ 
κυρίως TO dua τῷ κράματι τὸ ἀγγεῖον xapi- 
ἕεσθαι.... καὶ Δημοσθένης τοὺς προδιδόντας 
τὰς πατρίδας τοῖς ἐχθροῖς προπίνειν ἔφη. 


| 
| 
᾿ 
a 

{ 


7. τῇ γαστρὶ μετροῦντες : see noteon 


§ 8ὅ (on ΤιμόλαΞς). See Cic. Nat. Deor. 


I. 40 (113), quod dubitet omnia quae ad 


beatam vitam pertineant ventre metiri. 

9. ὅροι καὶ κανόνες, dounds and 
rules, i.e. they applied these as tests to 
whatever was presented to them as a 
public ροοά.---ἦσαν : plural,agreeing with 
ὅροι and κανόνες. 


το. ἀνατετροφότες, having overturned 


(i.e. reversed) these tests. a 
Longinus on the Sublime, 32, refers to 


ΠΕΡῚ TOY =STEPANOY 209 


| Ταύτης τοίνυν τῆς οὕτως αἰσχρᾶς καὶ περιβοήτου συστά- 297 
325 σεως καὶ κακίας, μᾶλλον δ᾽, ὦ ἄνδρες ᾿Αθηναῖοι, προδοσίας, 
εἰ δεῖ μὴ ληρεῖν, τῆς τῶν Ἑλλήνων ἐλευθερίας, ἥ τε πόλις 
παρὰ πᾶσιν ἀνθρώποις ἀναίτιος γέγονεν ἐκ τῶν ἐμῶν πολι- 
/ Ν 3 2 > ε A > ,ὔ 3 9 “~ > % ’ὔ 
τευμάτων καὶ ἐγὼ Tap ὑμῖν. εἶτά μ᾽ ἐρωτᾷς ἀντὶ ποίας ς 
las > an a FAY , , ν A 
ἀρετῆς ἀξιῶ τιμᾶσθαι; ἐγὼ δέ σοι λέγω ὅτι, TOV πολιτευο- 
, ἣν ον ἂν. / ε fa 3 la 
μένων παρὰ τοῖς Ἕλλησι διαφθαρέντων ἁπάντων, ἀρξαμένων 
: 3 Ἂς A , Ης ε Ν ’ὔ ἴω 4“ γιά 9.2 ’, 
ἀπὸ σοῦ, πρότερον μὲν ὑπὸ Φιλίππου νῦν δ᾽ ὑπ᾽ ᾿Αλεξάνδρου, 
a 3, Ἂν ¥ » / bese ne | ἴω 
ἐμὲ οὔτε καιρὸς οὔτε φιλανθρωπία λόγων οὔτ᾽ ἐπαγγελιῶν 298 
μέγεθος οὔτ᾽ ἐλπὶς οὔτε φόβος οὐτ᾽ ἀλλ᾽ οὐδὲν ἐπῆρεν οὐδὲ 
προηγάγετο ὧν ἔκρινα δικαίων καὶ συμφερόντων τῇ πατρίδι - 
οὐδὲν προδοῦναι, οὐδ᾽, ὅσα συμβεβούλευκα πώποτε τουτοισὶ, 
lal ν ἴω 
ὁμοίως ὑμῖν ὥσπερ ἂν τρυτάνη ῥέπων ἐπὶ τὸ λῆμμα συμβε- 5 


- 


§ 297. 2 oom. Ar. 3. δὴ (for δεῖ). 4. παρ᾽ ἅπασιν V6. 
6. δέ 2, L; δή vulg. 

8 298. 2. οὔτε φόβος οὔτε χάρις L, vulg.; οὔτε χάρις om. =! (added above), O. 
4. Τούτοις At; Touro A2, B. 5. ὥσπερ ἂν τρυτάνῃ F, Y; ὥσπερ av τρυτανῆηι 


(later εἰ ἐν over αν Tp, ἐ in ἐν now erased) Σ; ὥσπερ ἂν εἰ ἐν τρυτάνῃ L, Β, ΟἹ, vulg. ; 
ὥσπερ ἐν τρυτάνῃ AT. 2. 


, - den sd - 3 s 2 a 
πλήθειαν αὐτων ws αναγκαίαν ἐνταῦθα 
συνεφέλκεται. Then, after a quotation 
of this passage, he adds, ἐνταῦθα τῷ 


this passage (4—10) as a proper exception 
to the rule (of which Demosthenes was a 
ὅρος) allowing only two or at most three 


metaphors on one point (ἐπὶ ταὐτοῦ). He 
says: ὁ τῆς χρείας δὲ καιρὸς, ἔνθα τὰ πάθη 
χειμάρρου δίκην ἐλαύνεται, καὶ τὴν πολυ- 


THE EPILOGUE, §§ 297—323- Here 
we have the four characteristics of the 
ἐπίλογος, as Aristotle gives them (Rhet. 
III. 19, 1): arguments which will dispose 
the hearers favourably to the speaker and 
unfavourably to his opponent, amplifica- 
tion and depreciation, excitement of emo- 
tions, and recapitulation. He begins by 
claiming for himself the credit of keeping 
Athens free from the notorious conspiracy 
against Grecian liberty which he has 
just mentioned ; and he charges Aeschines 
with failing in all the characteristics of 
a patriotic citizen which his own course 
exemplifies (§§ 297—-300). He recapitu- 
lates some of his chief services in pro- 
viding Athens with means of defence, and 
asks what similar claims Aeschines has to 


. 


πλήθει τῶν τροπικῶν ὁ κατὰ τῶν προδοτῶν 
ἐπιπροσθεῖ τοῦ ῥήτορος θυμός. 


the public gratitude (§§ 301—313). He 
objects to being compared with the great 
men of former times, though he declares 
that he can bear such a comparison far 
better than. his opponent (§§ 314—323). 

8 297. 1. περιβοήτου, otorious. 

3. εἰ δεῖ μὴ ληρεῖν, 1.6. to call things 
by their right names, referring to mpodo- 
σίας. 

4- παρὰ πᾶσιν ἀνθρώποις, i.e. 271 the 
minds of all men; but παρὰ τοῖς “Ἕλλησι 
(7), among the Greeks; in § 274! both 
ideas are combined. 

5. ἐρωτᾷς; see Aesch. 236. 

7. ἁπάντων : exaggeration; but see 
§ 304.—apEapévev ἀπὸ cod, yourself first 
and foremost. 


§ 298. 4. οὐδ᾽. ὁμοίως tpiv...cup- 


14 


210 AHMOZOENOY2 


βούλευκα, ἀλλ᾽ ἀπ᾽ ὀρθῆς καὶ δικαίας καὶ ἀδιαφθόρου τῆς 
ψυχῆς" 
> / Ν / Ag ἢ lal Ν / ’, 
ἀνθρώπων προστὰς πάντα ταῦθ᾽ ὑγιῶς καὶ δικαίως πεπολί- 
299 ἐξόδῳ 


ἴω > Ν 
καὶ μεγίστων δὴ πραγμάτων των KAT ἐμαυτὸν 


Ν on λιν ρος, ~ ~ Ἂ \ ‘\ ~ 
διὰ ταῦτ ἀξιῶ τιμᾶσθαι. τὸν δὲ TeX τοῦτος 
ὃν σύ μου διέσυρες, καὶ τὴν ταφρείαν ἄξια μὲν χάριτος καὶ 
ἐπαίνου κρίνω, πῶς γὰρ οὔ; πόρρω μέντοι που τῶν ἐμαυτῷ 


πεπολιτευμένων τίθεμαι. 


οὐ λίθοις ἐτείχισα τὴν πόλιν οὐδὲ 


5 πλίνθοις ἐγὼ, οὐδ᾽ ἐπὶ τούτοις μέγιστον τῶν ἐμαυτοῦ φρονῶ: 


7. πάντα μοι πέπρακται (after ψυχῆ) L? (mg.), vulg. ; 
τῶν (before κατ᾽) om. =! (added above, now nearly erased). 8. 
δικαίως καὶ ἁπλῶς Al. 2 


φατρίαν (!) V6. 


added 2. ταῦθ᾽ om. At. 
§ 299. 2. ταφρίαν ΑΙ; 


2, L}, F, 6, Ar; οὐ yap NiO. B, vulg. 


om. 2, L!, Ar; “oe om. ®. 
mpoor with as 


3. “ποῦ ΟΠ. AI. 4. οὐ λίθοις 


βεβούλευκα (5), sor have I given my 
advice, like you, inclining towards gain 
like a balance, i.e. as a balance would 
incline if a weight were put into one of 
the scales: ὥσπερ ἂν (sc. péra). This is 
illustrated by a striking passage in V. 12: 
προῖκα Ta πράγματα κρίνω καὶ λογίζομαι, 
καὶ οὐδὲν λῆμμ᾽ ἂν οὐδεὶς ἔχοι πρὸς οἷς ἐγὼ 
πεπολίτευμαι καὶ λέγω δεῖξαι προσηρτημέ- 
νον. ὀρθὸν οὖν, ὅ τι ἂν mor’ am’ αὐτῶν 
ὑπάρχῃ τῶν πραγμάτων, τὸ συμφέρον φαί- 
νεταί μοι. ὅταν δ᾽ ἐπὶ θάτερα ὥσπερ εἰς 
τρυτάνην ἀργύριον προσενέγκῃς, οἴχεται φέ- 
ρον καὶ καθείλκυκε τὸν λογισμὸν ἐφ᾽ αὑτὸ, 
καὶ οὐκ ἂν ἔτ᾽ ὀρθῶς οὐδ᾽ ὑγιῶς ὁ τοῦτο 
ποιήσας περὶ οὐδενὸς λογίσαιτο. (See notes 
of Westermann and Dindorf on this pas- 
sage.) See also Lucian, Amor. 4, ἐγὼ 
μὲν γὰρ ὁ πληγεὶς ἑκατέρῳ καθάπερ ἀκρι- 
βὴς τρυτάνη ταῖς ἐπ᾽ ἀμφότερα πλάστιγξιν 
ἰσορρόπως ταλαντεύομαι. 

7: μεγίστων ... ἀνθρώπων, lit. che 
wetghtiest concerns of (all) the men of my 
ihe: (partitive). 

8 299. τ. τειχισμὸν, the repairing 
of the walls of Athens in 337—336 B.C., 
for which Demosthenes was τειχοποιός. 
For the decree providing for the appoint- 
ment of τειχοποιοί by the tribes in 337 B.c. 
and its exact date, see Aesch. III. 27. 
Demosthenes was then appointed recxo- 
mows by his tribe, the Πανδιονίς, and 
received from the treasury (according to 


Aesch. 31) nearly ten talents for the ex- 
penses (see § 113° and note). 

2. ὃν σύ μου διέσυρες : cf. τοῦτό μου 
διαβάλλει § 28%. 

3. πόρρω, i.e. far below. 

4. οὐ λίθοις ἐτείχισα τὴν πόλιν: a 
famous passage, often quoted by the 
rhetoricians. See the beginning of the 
ὑπόθεσις οἵ Libanius. Plutarch (Lycurg. 
19; Lac. Apophth., Lyc. 28) quotes a 
saying of Lycurgus the law-giver, οὐκ ἂν 
εἴη ἀτείχιστος πόλις ἅτις ἀνδράσι Kal ov 
πλίνθοις ἐστεφάνωται. Lord Brougham is 
eloquent on this passage (see p. 200). 
Whiston refers to Sir Wm Jones’s ode, 
‘“‘ What constitutes a State?” However 
familiar the idea may have been, the pas- 
sage is a most effective answer to the 
taunts of Aeschines (236) about the walls 
and ditches. 

5. πλίνθοις : not “ tiled-roofs”’ (as 
Lord Brougham strangely translates), but 
sun-dried bricks, of which no small part 
of the walls of Athens and of the Long 
Walls to the Piraeus were built. The 
brick wall was built on a solid foundation 
of stone, the height and thickness of 
which differed according to the import- 
ance of the position. Dérpfeld (in Schuch- 
hardt, Schliemann’s Excavations, p. 342, 
Engl. Tr.), in describing the walls of the 


Second City on the hill of Troy, says: — 


‘Such walls of defence, built of brick — 


7" 


326 


ΠΕΡῚ TOY STEPANOY 211 


> Ψ oe AQ - i. ἣν 4 4 ἴω [2 ’ὕ 

ἀλλ᾽ ἐὰν τὸν ἐμὸν τειχισμὸν βούλῃ δικαίως σκοπεῖν, εὑρήσεις 

ὅπλα καὶ πόλεις καὶ τόπους καὶ λιμένας καὶ ναῦς καὶ 

ταῦτα 300 
> / > Ἂς εὖ a 9 a ν - = > , 

προὐβαλόμην ἐγὼ πρὸ τῆς ᾿Αττικῆς, ὅσον ἣν ἀνθρωπίνῳ 

λογισμῷ δυνατὸν, καὶ τούτοις ἐτείχισα τὴν χώραν, οὐχὶ τὸν 


\ ᾽ν ᾿ Ν ε Ν ΄ὕ 3 , 
[πολλοὺς | ὑππτους και TOUS UTEP TOUT@MV αμυνομεένοῦυς. 


κύκλον τοῦ Πειραιῶς οὐδὲ τοῦ οὐδέ γ᾽ ἡττήθην 
ἐγὼ τοῖς λογισμοῖς Φιλίππου, π 


παρασκευαῖς, ἀλλ᾽ ol τῶν συμμάχων στρατηγοὶ καὶ αἱ 


ἴστε S. 
Tow 


ὀχλοῦ γε καὶ ΚΣ οὐδὲ ταῖς 5 


οἰ 167 (334--326 B.c.), lines 55, 58, 78. 


6. βούλη (ει over ἡ) Y. δικαίως om. V6. 7. καὶ πόλεις om. At. 
8. modXovs MSS., VOm., Bl.; in [ J] Reiske, Bk.; om. West., Lips. ἀμυνο- 
μένους XL, vulg.; ἀμυνουμένους Β. 

ὃ 800. 2. προὐβαλλόμην Y, V6. ᾿Ατικῆς (τ above) Σ. ὅσα Y. 
3. πόλιν (for χώραν) A2 (with χώραν in mg.). τὸν om. O. 4. κύκλον μόνον 
vulg.; μόνον om. Σ, L', Ar. ἄστεως 2; ἄστεος L, vulg. 5. Tots τοῦ Pid. 


oy. V6. 


with a low substructure of stone, were in 
use at every period of antiquity, as we 


see in the brick walls of Eleusis, which 


are still well preserved, and in the town 
walls of Athens, of which some fragments 
are still to be seen.”’ See Vitruvius, II. 
8, 9: nonnullis civitatibus et publica 
opera et privata, domos etiam regias e 
latere structas licet videre, et primum 
Athenis murum qui spectat Hymettum 
montem et Pentelensem: cf. Plin. N. H. 
ΝΠ 172. sce C. I. Att. 11., No. 
See 
- Thue. 1. 93, of θεμέλιοι παντοίων λίθων 
ὑπόκεινται (of the walls of Athens). The 
stone walls of Mantinea, which are still 
standing almost complete, have at most 
only four courses of stone, which were once 
surmounted by a wall of brick: Pausanias 
describes this wall as ὠμῆς @kodounuévov 
τῆς πλίνθου, built of raw (i.e. unbaked) 
bricks (vill. 8, 7). See Curtius, Pelo- 
ponnesos, I. 
unbaked bricks explains the mystery of 
the disappearance of so many miles of 
wall between Athens and the Piraeus, 

and around these towns themselves. 
ἡ. τόπους, countries, Euboea, Boeotia, 

the Chersonese, as opposed to cities. 
8. Ihave bracketed πολλοὺς, to avoid 
the difficulty of taking it with both ἵππους 
and τοὺς ἀμυνομένους or changing its posi- 


p- 236. The common use of, 


tion to another unsatisfactory one. Vomel, 
who retains it, refers to § 237°, δισχίλιοι 
ἱππεῖς.---τοὺς ὑπὲρ τούτων ἀμυνομένους, 
the defenders of these (our fellow-citizens) ; 
τούτων for τουτωνί, “wegen des Hiatus” 
(Bl.). The present ἀμυνομένους is amply 
justified by Isoc. VIII. 139, πολλοὺς ἕξο- 
μεν τοὺς ἑτοίμως Kal προθύμως συναγωνιζο- 
μένους ἡμῖν, and Lycurg. Leocr. 54, 
ἐλαχίστους ἕξετε τοὺς ὑπὲρ ὑμῶν αὐτῶν 
κινδυνεύοντας. (West.) 


§ 800. 2. προὐβαλόμην: cf. 88 ογ8 
and 301°.—dvOpwrive λογισμῷ: cf. 
8 193". 

3. τὸν KUKAOv τοῦ Πειραιῶς : che 


circuit of the Piraeus was assigned to the 
tribe Pandionis, to which Demosthenes 
belonged. See the decree in Plut. Mor. 
p- 851 A, δύο τἄφρους περὶ τὸν Πειραιᾶ 
ταφρεύσας (of Demosthenes). 

5. λογισμοῖς may refer to the en- 
counter with Python (§ 136) and also to 
the embassies mentioned in § 244.— 
Φιλίππου : with ἡττήθην. 

6. οἱ τῶν συμμάχων στρατηγοὶ: the 
only generals of the allies of whom we 
hear are the two Thebans, Proxenus, who 
commanded the mercenary force which 
was beaten and destroyed by Philip at 
Amphissa (see Hist. ὃ 78), and Theagenes, 
who led a phalanx at Chaeronea: of 
these Dinarchus (I. 74) says, ἐπὶ δὲ τοῖς 


14---2 


212 AHMOZOENOY2 


, ἴω , , ε ‘ , 5 , > “ 
δυνάμεις ΤΊ) τυχΊ)- τινες AL Τούτων ἀποδείξεις ; EVAPYELS 


καὶ φανεραί. σκοπεῖτε δέ.! 
301 ΠΣ “χρῆν τὸν εὔνουν πολίτην ποιεῖν, τί τὸν μετὰ πάσης 
προνοίας καὶ προθυμίας καὶ δικαιοσύνης ὑπὲρ τῆς πατρίδος 
“- πολιτευόμενον; οὐκ ἐκ μὲν θαλάττης τὴν Εὔβοιαν προβα- 
λέσθαι πρὸ τῆς ᾿Αττικῆς, ἐκ δὲ τῆς μεσογείας τὴν Βοιωτίαν, 
ς ἐκ δὲ τῶν πρὸς Πελοπόννησον τόπων τοὺς ὁμόρους ταύτῃ; 
οὐ τὴν σιτοπομπίαν, ὅπως παρὰ πᾶσαν φιλίαν ἄχρι τοῦ 
802 Πειραιῶς κομισθήσεται, προϊδέσθαι; καὶ τὰ μὲν σῶσαι τῶν 
ὑπαρχόντων ἐκπέμποντα βοηθείας καὶ λέγοντα καὶ γράφοντα 
τοιαῦτα, τὴν Προκόννησον, τὴν Χερρόμῃσον, τὴν Τένεδον, 


τὰ δ᾽ ὅπως οἰκεῖα καὶ σύμμαχ᾽ ὑπάρξει πρᾶξαι, τὸ Βυζάν- 
ΧΟ ν \ ¥ 
5 tuov, τὴν "ABvoov, τὴν Εὐβοιαν; Kat τῶν μὲν τοῖς ἐχθροῖς 


a ~ —— 


——— 


§ 301. 1. xo Al. 2. 2. φιλοτιμίας (for προθ.) Φ (yp). 5. πρὸς added 
in mg. >. 6. σιτοπομπίαν Σ, L, vulg. (see § 87°). 7. Πειραιως =? (by corr. fr. 


Πειρέως) ; Πειραιέως L. 
§ 802. 5. 
4. ὑπάρξει Σ.1,, Ar, Φ; ὑπάρξῃ vulg. 


= Ss 


mepudécbar Y. 
Προκόννησον 2, vulg. ; 


Προικόννησον L; ἸΠροικόνησον A2, B. 
5. aBvdov = (‘ later). 


ξένοις τοῖς eis "Αμφισσαν συλλεγεῖσι Πρό- 
ἕενος ὁ προδότης ἐγένετο, ἡγεμὼν δὲ τῆς 
φάλαγγος κατέστη Θεαγένης, ἄνθρωπος ἀτυ- 
χὴς καὶ δωροδόκος ὥσπερ οὗτος (Demo- 
sthenes). Plutarch (Mor. 259 D) describes 
Theagenes as having the same _ public 
spirit as Epaminondas and Pelopidas. 
See notes on §§ 264 and 303’. 

In §§ 801. 918 the orator recapitu- 
lates his own chief services, with which he 
compares the public career of Aeschines. 

8 801. 1. τί χρῆν κ.τ.λ., what was 
his duty 7---ποιεῖν, of a course of action, 
to be explained by several aorists, each of 
a special act. In the following series of 
questions, all introduced by χρῆν, the 
orator states the various problems which 
faced the Athenian statesman of that day 
and the obvious solutions of them. 

3. ἐκ θαλάττης : cf. § 2304.—mpoBa- 
λέσθαι : cf. προυβαλόμην, ὃ 300% With 
this figure of ¢hrowing up Euboea as a 
wall of defence to Attica, compare that in 
§ 717 (see note). See Aesch. 111. 84, vat, 
ἀλλὰ χαλκοῖς Kal ἀδαμαντίνοις τείχεσιν, ὡς 
αὐτός φησι, τὴν χώραν ἡμῶν ἐτείχισε, τῇ 
τῶν Εὐβοέων καὶ Θηβαίων συμμαχίᾳ, per- 


haps added later, as a sarcastic allusion . 
to this passage. 

5. τοὺς ὁμόρους ταύτῃ, our neigh- 
bours on this side, as Megara and Corinth 
(cf. § 237). 

6. παρὰ πᾶσαν φιλίαν (sc. γῆν) : i.e. 
that the corn-trade should pass along an 
entirely friendly coast (cf. § 878). For 
the subject of 88 301, 302, see 88 71, 79— 
82, 87—89, 240, 241, and Hist. 88 58, 63, 
64, 67, 68. ' 

§ 302. 1. The measures mentioned 
in τὰ μὲν σῶσαι and τὰ δ᾽... πρᾶξαι (4) 
were designed to secure a friendly coast 
for the corn-trade (§ 301°).<-ra@v ὑπαρ- 
χόντων belongs strictly only to τὰ μὲν. 
potentially also to τὰ δὲ, i.e. places which _ 
we depended on securing (cf. mene ὅπως 
ὑπάρξει). 

2. γράφοντα τοιαῦτα, by proposing 
measures accordingly. 

5. Αβυδον : see Hist. ἃ 63.—Hv- 
Bovav: Weil proposes Σηλυμβρίαν, as 
Euboea has been just mentioned; but 
Euboea, with its long coasts, was always 
essential to the safety of the corn trade. 


| ΠΕΡΙ TOY STE@ANOY > 213 
re — -- τὰ 


7 ω , x Ss 5 “ -“' > > ys 
ὑπαρχουσῶν δυνάμεων τὰς μεγίστας ἀφελεῖν, ὧν δ᾽ ἐνέλειπε 
τῇ πόλει, ταῦτα προσθεῖναι; ταῦτα τοίνυν ἅπαντα πέπρακται 


βεβουλευμένα, ὦ avdpes ᾿Αθηναῖοι, ἐὰν ἄνευ φθόνου TUS 
βούληται σκοπεῖν, ὀρθῶς εὑρήσει καὶ πεπραγμένα πάσῃ 
δικαιοσύνῃ, καὶ τὸν ἑκάστου Καύρον" οὐ πάρεθέντα οὐδ᾽ 
᾿ἀγνοηθέντα οὐδὲ προεθέντα UT ἐμοῦ, καὶ ὅσ᾽ εἰς ἑνὸς 5 
ἀνδρὸς δύναμιν καὶ λογισμὸν ἧκεν, οὐδὲν ἐλλειφθέν. ὶ εἰν 
Ν ἃ / a xX , 3 Ν “ἡ ἴω μ £- 
δὲ ἢ δαίμονός τινος ἢ τύχης ἰσχὺς ἢ στρατηγῶν havrdTyns— 
ἢ τῶν προδιδόντων τὰς πόλεις ὑμῶν κακία ἢ πάντα ταῦτ᾽ 
Ξ-. > , au 4 Y 1 4 ΄, ΄, 3 a 
327 ἐλυμαίνετο τοῖς ὁλοις Ews ἀνέτρεψεν, TL Δημοσθένης ἀδικεῖ; | 
εἰ δ᾽ οἷος ἐγὼ παρ᾽ ὑμῖν κατὰ τὴν ἐμαυτοῦ τάξιν, εἷς ἐν 304 
δε...» A ε , af; SN he an 4.0. 5.9 
ἑκάστῃ τῶν Ἑλληνίδων πόλεων ἀνὴρ ἐγένετο, μᾶλλον δ᾽ εἰ 
ψνν , ΄ . >. » 9. 9 , ὃν ἮΝ 
ἕν᾽ ἄνδρα μόνον Θετταλία καὶ ἕν᾽ avdp ᾿Αρκαδία ταὐτὰ 


6. ἐνέλειπε Σ,1,, At, Y; ἐνέλιπε vulg. 7. τοίνυν ὑμῖν L, vulg.; ὑμῖν om. Σ, At. 


ὃ 303. 3. βούληταί Tis Ar. 4, 5. οὐδ᾽ ἀγνοηθέντα οὐδὲ προδοθέντα vulg., om. 
L', add. mg. 5. προεθέντα (for προδοθ.) Σ, Y, At; παρεθέντα F. ἑνὸς ἀνδρὸς 
z, L, Y, V6; ἀνδρὸς ἑνὸς vulg. 6. σύνεσιν (for δύναμιν) Α2. ἐλλειφθέν 
L, vulg., (late H over e.) 2. 7. Twos after τύχης A2. τῶν στρατη- 
yar Φ. 8. ἢ (before πάντα) om. Αἵ; ἢ καὶ Σ (yp), Φ (yp). πάντα 
tatra 2, L, vulg.; Sabri πάντα Al. ἅμα (after ταῦτα) Σ (yp), vulg.; om. Σ, L, V6. 
9. pale ero Zz, L, Y, O (corr.); ἐλυμήνατο vulg. ἀνέτρεψε vulg. ; ; ἀνέτρεψαν 


ΣΤΥ, 2; ἀνέτρεψε (ἀ over final ε) Β; ἀνέστρεψε V6. 
2 8 804. τ. εἰ δ᾽ οἷος L; εἰ οσ Σὶ (corr. to ed 6 olos) ; ; ef δ᾽ οἷος nv vulg.; ἦν om. 


med, Y,-Ar. 2. avypom. A2. 3. ἄνδρα μόνον Σ, L, vulg.; μόνον ava. A2. 


6. τὰς μεγίστας : especially Thebesin 5 opposed to the weakness and zzcapacity 
339 B.C.—ov ἐνέλειπε TH πόλει, what the (φαυλότης) or the treachery of men. One 
city lacked: ἐλλείπει is sometimes im- οὗ the Athenian generals at Chaeronea, 
personal, like ἐνδεῖ, as here; so Plat. Lysicles, was accused of treachery by Ly- 
Leg. 844 B, εἴ τισι τόποις... ἐλλείπει THY curgus and condemned to death (Diod. 
᾿ ἀναγκαίων πωμάτων, and 740 C. XVI. 88): see note on $§ 2641 and 300°. 
$303. 2. βεβουλευμένα ὀρθῶς εὑρή- g. τοῖς ὅλοις: see note on ἃ 2787.— 
wet (or. 0b/.) refers chiefly to πολιτεύματα. ἀνέτρεψεν, overset, the familiar figure of 


. τὰ οὐ παρεθέντα.. ,“προεθέντα, opfortu- the ship of state: the better Mss. have 
| nitatem cuiusgue rei non per negligentiam ἀνέτρεψαν, which West. defends on the 
DS Pustirmiscam mec ignoratam nec prodi- ground that οἱ προδιδόντες is the logical 


_tam(Dissen). παρεθέντα implies careless- subject; but this should affect ἐλυμαίνετο 
mess (cf. Vill. 34), προεθέντα wilfulness  also.—dBukei, not 7s doing wrong, but zs 
(cf. viii. 56). to blame for a past wrong (Μ. T. 27). 
5. ὅσ᾽ implies τοσούτων, depending § 304. 3. Oerradia...Apxadia: see 
on οὐδέν. §$ 63, 64. ‘‘Philip’s party in the one 
ἢ. δαίμονος ἢ τύχης: cf. τὸν δαίμονα opened Northern Greece to him, and in 
καὶ τὴν τύχην, Aesch. Ill. 115, 157. The the other neutralized the Peloponnesus” 
_ strength (ἰσχύς) of thesuperhuman powers (Simcox). 


5 oe 


lal > nw , ἈΝ lanl 3 la , aA \ 
τοῖς ἐμοῖς ψηφίσμασι καὶ τοῖς ἐμοῖς πολιτεύμασιν, a καϊβοϑβ. 


214 ᾿ΔΗΛΛΟΣΘΕΝΟῪΣ 


φρονοῦντ᾽ ἔσχεν ἐμοὶ, οὐδεὶς οὔτε τῶν ἔξω Πυλῶν Ἑλλήνων 
» A » A wn wn 3 , 3 “ἡ 5 \ 
305 ovrTe τῶν εἰσω τοῖς παροῦσι κακοῖς ἐκέχρητ ἂν, ἀλλὰ 
πάντες ἂν ὄντες ἐλεύθεροι καὶ αὐτόνομοι μετὰ πάσης ἀδείας 
ἀσφαλῶς ἐν εὐδαιμονίᾳ τὰς ἑαυτῶν ῴκουν πατρίδας, τούτων 
4 Ν ’ὔ > ἴω ε lal \ A » ΕῚ 
τοσούτων καὶ τοιούτων ἀγαθῶν ὑμῖν καὶ τοῖς ἄλλοις ᾿Αθη- 
ν ᾿] 3 κ΄ ν nr an 
ἵνα δ᾽ εἰδῆτε OTL πολλῷ τοῖς 
λόγοις ἐλάττοσι χρῶμαι τῶν ἔργων, εὐλαβούμενος ’ τὸν φθόγον, ; 
λέγε μοι ταυτὶ καὶ ἀνάγνωθι λαβὼν τὸν ἀριθμὸν τῶν βοηθειῶν 
κατὰ τὰ ἐμὰ ψηφίσματα. 


» » /, o> 4, 
5 ναίοις ἔχοντες χάριν δι ἐμέ. 


ΑΡΙΘΜΟΣ ΒΟΗΘΕΙΩΝ. 


ἴω wn Ἂ 3 Ν 
806 Ταῦτα καὶ τοιαῦτα πράττειν, Αἰσχίνη, τὸν καλὸν κἀγαθὸν 


πολίτην δεῖ, ὧν κατορθουμένων μὲν μεγίστοις ἀναμφισβη- 


ae 
4. ἔσχεν ZL, Ar; ἔσχον vulg. οὐδένες (for οὐδεὶς) Cobet, Vom. 5. ἐκέχρητ᾽ 
ἂν vulg.; ἐκέχρηντ᾽ ἂν Σ, L, Cob., Vom. 


8 305. 5. 


τούτων Σ, 1,1; τῶν vulg. 
τ' 


note. ) 
ὃ 306. τ. 
τοιαῦτα L. 2. 


vulg.; ἐν om. 2, L, B, Ar. 


4. οὐδεὶς... ἐκέχρητ᾽ av: Cobet reads 
by conjecture οὐδένες (as = has ἐκέχρηντ᾽ 
av), referring to Vv. 5 and XIx. 66. See 
§ 23°, πρὸς οὐδέν᾽, where Cobet and 
Dindorf read οὐδένας with severa! Mss. 

§ 305. 2. ἀν is repeated with ᾧκουν, 
contrary to general usage, because of the 
change of time from would have fallen 
anto (ἐκέχρητ᾽ av) to would now be dwell- 
ing tn. This mention of Thessaly and 
Arcadia has special reference to the final 
struggle with Philip (BI.). 

7. λέγε καὶ ἀνάγνωθι: cf. XIX. 70, 
and note on ἃ 282.--βοηθειῶν: forces 
sent out for special purposes, like those 
mentioned in ὃ 3027: see IV. 32, μὴ Bon- 
θείαις πολεμεῖν (ὑστεριοῦμεν yap ἁπάντων) 
ἀλλὰ παρασκευῇ συνεχεῖ καὶ δυνάμει, and 
cf. Iv. 41. The famous expedition which 
checked Philip at Thermopylae in 352 B.c. 
(Iv. 17) is called a βοήθεια in XIX. 84. 
Often βοήθεια means a mere razd. 


= and L end the text with ἀνάγνωθι λαβών" 
BOHOEION | KATA TA EMA ΨΗΦΙΣΜΑΤΑ (in two lines). 


7. λαβὲ (for λέγε) Ar. 
followed (in 2) by APIOMO> 
(See Vo6mel’s 


ταῦτα καὶ τὰ τοιαῦτα vulg.; τὰ om. Σ, O, F, ®, V6; aura καὶ τὰ 
ὦ γῆ καὶ θεοὶ (after μὲν) 1.2, vulg.; om. Σ, ES Ὑ: 


ἐν μεγίστοις 


§ 806. 1. ταῦτα...πράττειν.... δεῖ sums 
up the reply to the question τί χρῆν... 
ποιεῖν ; in § 3011, but with a change in 
tense. He asked what was the duty etc., 
with special reference to the case in hand; 
and he replies in general terms ¢hzs zs the 
duty. ποιεῖν and πράττειν have here the 
same sense, as have χρή (in xpyv) and δεῖ. 
Spengel and West. changed de? here to 
ἔδει to complete the correspondence with 
§ 3011. But if we read ἔδει here, we 
must supply δεῖ with the infinitives in 
§ 307; see dv...Aurjoyn (§ 307°). 

2. κατορθουμένων -- εἰ κατωρθοῦτο, if 
they had been successful (as they were not), 
to which the apodosis is ὑπῆρχεν εἷναι, zt 
belonged to us to be, i.e. we should properly 
have been: ὑπῆρχεν may be used with 
the infinitive like ἔδει and χρῆν.---μεγί- 
στοις (sc. ἡμῖν)... καὶ τὸ δικαίως προσῆν, 
i.e. indisputably, and (7 might add) 
7ustly, greatest: δικαίως stands as a mere 


328 


ΠΕΡῚ TOY ZTEANOY 215 


, ἘΓΡΕΑ πὺν Ν bs M4 Seer ε ΕΑ \ 

τήτως ὑπῆρχεν εἶναι, καὶ TO δικαίως πρδδσῆν, ὡς ἑτέρως δὲ 

’ Ἂς ~ iT) ~ , οἱ \ , 

συμβάντων τὸ γοῦν εὐδοκιμεῖν περίεστι καὶ TO μηδένα 
/ Ν ἴω 

μέμφεσθαι τὴν πόλιν μηδὲ τὴν προαίρεσιν αὐτῆς, ἀλλὰ τὴν 
4 

τύχην KaKilew τὴν οὕτω τὰ πράγματα κρίνασαν, οὐ μὰ Δί 
3 3 4 ~ la 

οὐκ ἀποστάντα τῶν συμφερόντων TH πόλει μισθώσαντα δ᾽ 
ε “A “ ἴω 

αὑτὸν τοῖς ἐναντίοις, τοὺς ὑπὲρ τῶν ἐχθρῶν καιροὺς ἀντὶ 

τῶν τῆς πατρίδος θεραπεύειν, οὐδὲ τὸν μὲν πράγματ᾽ ἀξια 
a , ε * Rae OCT \ , \ ΄ 5. 

τῆς πόλεως ὑποστάντα λέγειν καὶ γράφειν καὶ μένειν ἐπὶ 
, ᾽ὔ x , 50. lan A 

τούτων βασκαίνειν, av δέ τις ἰδίᾳ τι λυπήσῃ, τοῦτο μεμνῆ- 
θ \ ca OE se / Ν 10 Το 

σθαι καὶ τηρεῖν, οὐδέ γ᾽ ἡσυχίαν ἄγειν ἄδικον καὶ ὕπουλον, 

ἃ Ν ἮΝ id » Ν », ε / / Ν 

ὃ σὺ ποιεῖς πολλάκις. ἔστι γὰρ, ἔστιν ἡσυχία δικαία καὶ 

"ἢ Le) / ἃ ε Ἂ la a ε A 

συμφέρουσα τῇ πόλει, ἣν οἵ πολλοὶ τῶν πολιτῶν ὑμεῖς 

ε ἴω Ὗ» a 

ἁπλῶς ἄγετε. ἀλλ᾽ οὐ ταύτην οὗτος ayer THY ἡσυχίαν, 

πολλοῦ γε καὶ δεῖ, ἀλλ᾽ ἀποστὰς ὅταν αὐτῷ δόξῃ τῆς 


3. ὑπάρχειν ®, B, corr. to ὑπῆρχεν F. 5. πόλιν καὶ V6. 6. τούτω 
changed to οὕτω 2. κρίνουσαν ΑἹ. 2. 
8 807. 2. οὐκ om. F. 4. τῶν ὑπὲρ τῆς ᾧ, Α2. 5. μένειν καὶ Ο (corr.). 


6. τούτων προελόμενον A2; τούτοις προελ. 1,; τοῦτον προελ. ΑΙ»; προελόμενον om. Σ, 


vulg. ἂν 2, L, V6; ἐὰν vulg. Teom. Az. λυπήισηι D. 7. οὐδέ γ᾽ 
z, L, Y, V6; Ὑ om. vulg. 3. ΟΣ, L, Ar; os vulg. 
ὃ 308. 2. ὑμεῖς ἁπλῶς Σ, L, vulg.; ἁπλώς ὑμεῖς At. 4. δοκῇ (o& over ox) F. 


word with the article; and προσῆν is be- 
longed there, 1.6. might properly be added. 
3. ὡς ἑτέρως, otherwise: see note on 
§ 85°. 
4. συμβάντων, not conditional (like 
κατορθουμένωνῚ, but simply temporal, zozw, 


_ when they (have) resulted otherwise.— 


περίεστι, chere is left to ws: the subject is 
τὸ εὐδοκιμεῖν Kal τὸ μηδένα...κρίνασαν (6). 

6. κακίζειν : the subject is πάντας, to 
be supplied from the preceding subject 
μηδένα. The same carelessness of ex- 
pression is still common; a famous case 
is the clause of the United States Con- 
stitution concerning fugitive slaves: ‘* No 
person held to service or labor in one 
state, under the laws thereof, escaping 
into another, shall...be discharged from 
said service or labor, but shall be de- 
livered up etc.” 

8 307. 1. ov μὰ Δί᾽ οὐκ : emphatic 


repetition, not a double negative: de? is 
understood here from ὃ 306%, and on 
it depend the infinitives θεραπεύειν etc. 
through ἄγειν (7). 

2. ἀποστάντα: strongly opposed to 
θεραπεύειν (4) and ὑποστάντα (5). 

4. τῶν τῆς πατρίδος (sc. καιρῶν), 
instead of the fuller form with ὑπέρ (as in 
3).—TOov vrootavra, the man who has 
bound himself (undertaken), object of 
βασκαίνειν. 

7. ὕπουλον, lit. festering within, of 
the quiet of Aesch., false, hollow: see 
Thuc. vit. 64 (end), τὴν ἀπὸ τῶν ᾿Αθη- 
ναίων ὕπουλον αὐτονομίαν (BI.). 

§ 808. 2. 
the majority. 

3. ἁπλῶς, 27 honest simplicity, with- 
out pretence, opposed to ὕπουλος τἡσυχία 
(3077).—ov ταύτην : cf. Aesch. III. 215, 
216. 


5 
307 


308 


οἱ πολλοὶ, here simply — 


216 AHMOZOENOY2 


TOU συνεχῶς λέγοντος ἢ Tapa τῆς τύχης TL συμβέβηκεν 
> ,ὔ “Δ » Ψ' 4 a Ν > ’ὔ 
-ἐναντίωμα ἢ ἄλλο τι δύσκολον γέγονε (πολλὰ δὲ τἀνθρώ- 
Twa): εἶτ᾽ ἐπὶ τούτῳ τῷ καιρῷ ῥήτωρ ἐξαίφνης ἐκ τῆς 
ἡσυχίας ὥσπερ πνεῦμ᾽ ἐφάνη, καὶ πεφωνασκηκὼς καὶ συνει- 
ιολοχὼς ῥήματα καὶ λόγους συνείρει τούτους σαφῶς καὶ 


β 
β 
5 πολιτείας (πολλάκις δὲ δοκεῖ) φυλάττει πηνίκ᾽ ἔσεσθε μεστοὶ 
β 


ἀπνευστεὶ, ὄνησιν μὲν οὐδεμίαν φέροντας οὐδ᾽ ἀγαθοῦ κτῆσιν 
οὐδενὸς, συμφορὰν δὲ TO τυχόντι τῶν πολιτῶν καὶ κοινὴν 
809 αἰσχύνην. καίτοι ταύτης τῆς μελέτης καὶ τῆς ἐπιμελείας, 
Αἰσχίνη, εἴπερ ἐκ ψυχῆς δικαίας ἐγίγνετο καὶ τὰ τῆς πατρί- 
δος συμφέροντα προῃρημένης, τοὺς καρποὺς ἔδει γενναίους 
καὶ καλοὺς καὶ πᾶσιν ὠφελίμους εἶναι, συμμαχίας πόλεων, 
5 πόρους χρημάτων, ἐμπορίου κατασκενὴν, νόμων συμφερόντων 


πηνίκ᾽ Σ, L; ὁπηνίκα (or κ᾽) vulg.; ὁπηνίχ᾽ ὑμεῖς At.2. 


5. φυλάττειν VO. 
ἢ om. ΟΣ (add. mg.). 


ἔσεσθαι (€ Over αἱ, now erased) 2; ἐστὲ L, vulg. 6. 


7. γὰρ (for δὲ) V6. 9. ἀνεφάνη ΑΙ. συνειλοχὼς vulg.; συνειλεχὼς 2, BI, , Bk.; 
συνειληχὼς Y, B?, F (yp), Οἷ: in XXI. 23, συνείλοχα 2. 10. συνείρει B!, Phot. ; 
συνήρει Σ, B23; συνήιρει Y. Il. ἀπνευστεί Σ. 

ὃ 309. 2. Αἰσχίνη after μελέτης (1) Ar, om. V6. 3, 4. καλοὺς Kal γεν- 
ναίους ®, At. 5. παρασκευὴν A2. 


5. φυλάττει πηνίκ᾽ ἔσεσθε μεστοί, he 
watches (to see) when you will be sated, 
an indirect question where we might ex- 
pect a temporal clause: ὁπηνίκα is the 
common reading. 

6. τοῦ συνεχῶς λέγοντος, wth your 
regular speaker, i.e. the one who is con- 
tinually advising you: see Plut. Cim. 5, 
ὁ δῆμος... μεστὸς ὧν τοῦ Θεμιστοκλέους. 

7. τἀνθρώπινα: sc. ἐναντιώματα. 

8. ῥήτωρ, as an orator, predicate to 
ἐφάνη (gnomic). 

9. ὥσπερ mvedp’, with ἐξαίφνης.--- 
πεφωνασκηκὼς : cf. ὃ 280°.—cvvedoxas, 
the only proper perf. act. of συλλέγω, 
though here = has συνειλεχώς. Σ has 
συνείλοχα in XXI. 23. Cf. συμφορήσας, 
§ 15°. 

10. ῥήματα: cf. § 2324.—cvvelpe, 
reels off (strings together). 

It. ἀπνευστεὶ, all in one breath (with- 
out taking breath). 

12. τῷ τυχόντι, Cuivis, fo any one who 
happens to hear them: see note on ὃ 13073, 


a 


-κοινὴν, public, opposed to τῷ τυχόντι. 

13. αἰσχύνην: BI. refers this to the 
speech described in § 35. 

§ 809. I. μελέτης, ἐπιμελείας, 2γαε- 
tice, study, referring to § 3οϑϑ ἢ, 

2. τὰ... προῃρημένης, ove which had 
made the interests of the fatherland 2ts 
choice (προαίρεσιν), connected by καὶ to 
δικαίας. , 

3. ἔδει εἶναι, ought to have been, im- 
plying that in the case of Aeschines they 
were not so.—yevvatovs: often used 
literally of fruits, as in Plat. Leg. 844 E, 
Thy γενναίαν viv λεγομένην σταφυλὴν ἢ τὰ 
γενναῖα σῦκα ἐπονομαζόμενα (Bl.): see 
also Plat. Rep. 3728, magas γενναίας καὶ 
ἄρτους. ; 

5. ἐμπορίου κατασκενὴν: 1.6. securing 
new commercial rights for Athens in 
some foreign seaport: see XX. 33, κατα- 


σκευάσας ἐμπόριον Θευδοσίαν, with Sandys's 


note. Weil quotes Dinarch. I. 96, τί 
κατεσκεύακεν οἰκοδόμημα Δημοσθένης ἐν τῷ 


ἐμπορίῳ τῷ ὑμετέρῳ; 


: 


ΠΕΡῚ TOY STEPANOY 217 


, “Ἅ 3 A > “A > , , 
θέσεις, τοῖς ἀποδειχθεῖσιν ἐχθροῖς ἐναντιώματα. τούτων 310 
> “ .ν»ν» 
γὰρ ἁπάντων ἦν ἐν τοῖς ἄνω χρόνοις ἐξέτασις, καὶ ἔδωκεν 
Ἐς -, Ν ’ὔ Ν > / > \ ~ 3 lal 
ὁ παρελθὼν χρόνος πολλὰς ἀποδείξεις ἀνδρὶ καλῷ τε κἀγαθῷ, 
ἐν οἷς οὐδαμοῦ σὺ φανήσει γεγονὼς, οὐ πρῶτος, οὐ δεύτερος, 
y 
οὐ τρίτος, οὐ τέταρτος, οὐ πέμπτος, οὐχ EKTOS, OVX ὁποστοσ- 5 
“ a Ν , Ἂς 
οῦν, οὔκουν ἐπί γ᾽ οἷς ἡ πατρὶς ηὐξάνετο. τίς γὰρ συμ- 311 
/ lal , , la aN ᾽ὔ δὲ 40 “ἃ 
μαχία σοῦ πράξαντος γέγονε τῇ πόλει; τίς δὲ βοήθεια ἢ 
ΜᾺ > / x / / Ν / ‘4 / 3 
κτῆσις εὐνοίας ἢ δόξης; τίς δὲ πρεσβεία, τίς διακονία δι 
ἃ ε 7, > ΄ ΄ὔ Ta 3 ΄, x σὰ ε A 
329 ἣν ἡ πόλις ἐντιμοτέρα; τί τῶν οἰκείων ἢ TOV ᾿Βλληνικῶν 
καὶ ξενικῶν οἷς ἐπέστης ἐπηνώρθωταυι; ποῖαι τριήρεις; ποῖα 5 
βέλη ; ποῖοι νεώσοικοι; Tis ἐπισκευὴ τειχῶν ; ποῖον ἱππικόν; 
(Tt τῶν ἁπάντων σὺ χρήσιμος εἶ; τίς ἢ τοῖς εὐπόροις ἣ τοῖς 


8 810. 2. ἦν καὶ ἐν Α2. 
νήσει =; φανήσῃ vulg. 
ἐπὶ οἷς γε καὶ Ο. 


S Glas 1 yap om. A2. 4 


5. ols vulg.; αἷς O; as 2; as L; ἐφ᾽ ἃ Ar; οἷς ἐπέστης om. F. 
γέγονας (for εἷ) Ar. 2. 


vulg.; dia σὲ om. 2, LI. ye 


8 310. 1. τούτων ἦν ἐξέτασις : ἐξέ- 
τασις is again a military term, as in § 3209, 
where it means @ mustering or review 
of hirelings etc., in which they were called 
forth to show themselves. Here, with 
a genitive denoting public services, it 
means likewise calling out and arraying 
such services to a man’s credit. (See note 
on ὃ 173%.) 

2. ἔδωκεν.. ἀποδείξεις, 1.6. the past 
gave many opportunities for showing such 
services, as it were, arraying them for 
a review. 

4. ἐν οἷς, 72 which class (the καλοί τε 
κἀγαθοί), as if ἀνδράσι had preceded.— 
οὐδαμοῦ: cf. § 320°. 

5. οὐχ ὁποστοσοῦν (cf. ὁστισοῦν), 7101 
im any rank whatsoever. Dissen thinks 
this alludes to a Delphic oracle given to 
the Megarians, quoted in the Scholia to 
Theoc. xiv. 48, 49, of which the last two 
verses are: 
ὑμεῖς δ᾽ ὦ Μεγαρεῖς οὔτε τρίτοι οὔτε τέ- 

τάρτοι 
οὔτε δυωδέκατοι, οὔτ᾽ ἐν λόγῳ οὔτ᾽ ἐν 

ἀριθμῷ. 
For the whole oracle (8 vss.) see the 


ἔδωκεν twice in =. Zz. 
6. ἐπί γ᾽ οἷς 2, L, Ar; ἐπεί ye καὶ vulg.; ἐπεὶ οἷς Y, F (yp); 


τε om. O. 4. 


pa- 


ἐντιμοτέρα γέγονε vulg.; yéy. om. Σ, LL 


ἐπηνώρθ. διὰ σὲ 


Scholia in Ahrens’s Bucol. Gr. I1., p. 381: 
see also Menander, frag. 154 (Kock). 

6. οὔκουν ἐπί γ᾽ ois, at all events, not 
in matters in which, etc. 

§ 311. These questions are argu- 
ments for the judgment just pronounced 
upon Aeschines. After the third ques- 
tion, the conjunctions are omitted in the 
speaker’s vehemence. With the whole 
passage compare XIX. 282. 

4. τῶν ‘EAAnviKev, opposed to τῶν 
οἰκείων, is the so-called foreign policy of 
Athens, i.e. her policy with other Greek 
states: see note on § 50". Here τῶν 
ξενικῶν is added to include her relations 
to other than Greek states, both being 
opposed to τῶν οἰκείων, her domestic 
policy. 

5. ποῖαι τριήρεις ; sc. γεγόνασι τῇ 
πόλει. 

7. τί... χρήσιμος εἶ; what in the 
world (τῶν ἁπάντων) ARE you good for ?— 
τίς ἢ... χρημάτων ; what public financial 
aid has ever come from you to either rich 
or poor? This is commonly referred to 
an equalization of the public burdens, by 
which both rich and poor would be bene- 


312 ἀλλ᾽, ὦ τᾶν, εἰ 


Lat πότε; : 


218 


AHMOZOENOY2 


> / Ν Ν Ν , / > ’ 
ἀπόροις πολυτικη και Ore βοήθεια ΧΡΉΜΟΒΟΣΝ ᾿ οὐδεμία. 


ἣν my “4 esch 
OOTLS, 


ἰ μηδὲν τούτων, εὐνοιά γε καὶ προθυμία. ποῦ; 
ὦ πάντων ἀδικώτατε, οὐδ᾽ ὅθ᾽ ἅπαντες ὅσοι 
πώποτ᾽ ἐφθέγξαντ᾽ ἐπὶ τοῦ βήματος εἰς σωτηρίαν ἐπεδίδοσαν, 


καὶ τὸ τελευταῖον ᾿Αριστόνικος τὸ συνειλεγμένον εἰς τὴν 


8. [χρημάτων] Weil, Bl. 


> ΄, “ἂν ee fe ey A θ ¥ > 9 LS δὰ 3 
5 ἐπιτιμιαν, οὐδὲ TOT OUTE παρὴλ ες OUT ETEOWKAS OQUVOEV, οὐκ 


mapa σοῦ (after χρημάτων) vulg., om. 2, Ar (add. 


mg.). οὐδεμία περὶ cod V6. 

§312. 1. éd7av 2. μηδὲν πάντων At. εὔνοιά τις καὶ Ο. προθυμία" 
ὅτου ποτέ =, 1, (γέ ποῦ ποτε mg.). 2. ὁτ ἅπαντες (ότ corr. to ὅτε) ae 3. ἐπεδίδ. 
eis σωτηρίαν At. 4. εἰς τὴν ἐπιτιμίαν ἀργύριον Ar; ἀργύριον eis τὴν ἐπιτιμίαν L?, 


vulg.; ἀργύριον om. Σ, L. Bs 


fitted. But Demosth. has always prided 
himself on transferring such burdens 
from the poor to the rich (see 88 102, 103). 
It must be that ““ἴο either rich or poor” 
means 20 anybody at all,—toduriKy καὶ 
κοινὴ is a rhetorical amplification, like 
the cases in the note to 8 4°: see XXV. 
22, ἔρανος γάρ ἐστι πολιτικὸς Kal κοινὸς 
πάνθ᾽ ὅσα, ταξάντων τῶν νόμων, ἕκαστος 
ἡμῶν ποιεῖ. 

Dinarchus seems to haye learnt a 
lesson from this passage, when in his 
speech against Demosthenes (06) he says, 
ποῖαι yap τριήρεις εἰσὶ κατεσκευασμέναι διὰ 
τοῦτον, ὥσπερ ἐπὶ EvBovdovu, τῇ πόλει; ἢ 
ποῖοι νεώσοικοι τούτου πολιτευομένου γεγό- 
νασι; πότε οὗτος ἢ διὰ ψηφίσματος ἢ 
νόμου ἐπηνώρθωσε τὸ ἱππικόν ; κιτ.λ. In 
the decree in Plut. Mor., p. 852, it is 
said of the financier Lycurgus, χειρο- 
τονηθεὶς δ᾽ ἐπὶ τῆς τοῦ πολέμου παρα- 
σκευῆς, ὅπλα μὲν πολλὰ καὶ βελῶν μυριάδας 
πέντε ἀνήνεγκεν εἰς τὴν ἀκρόπολιν, τετρα- 
κοσίας τριήρεις πλωίμους κατεσκεύασε, τὰς 
μὲν ἐπισκευάσας, τὰς δ᾽ ἐξ ἀρχῆς vav- 
πηγησάμενος" πρὸς δὲ τούτοις ἡμίεργα 
παραλαβὼν τούς τε νεωσοίκους καὶ τὴν 
σκευοθήκην καὶ τὸ θέατρον τὸ Διονυσιακὸν 
ἐξειργάσατο καὶ ἐπετέλεσε, τό τε στάδιον 
τὸ Παναθηναϊκὸν καὶ τὸ γυμνάσιον τὸ κατὰ 
Λύκειον κατεσκεύασε, καὶ ἄλλαις πολλαῖς 
κατασκευαῖς ἐκόσμησε τὴν πόλιν. This 
enumeration shows the standard of com- 
parison which Demosthenes had in mind, 
though he never professed to come up to 


οὔτε (after τότ᾽) om. F, ®, A2. 


οὐδὲ (for οὔτ᾽) Φ. 


it himself in his public improvements. 

§ 312. τ. 
address, found in three other passages of 
Demosthenes, I. 26, III. 29, XXV. 78; in 
all introducing an imaginary retort pt an 
opponent. 

3. ἐφθέγξαντ᾽ : cf. § 199%, ὃς οὐδ᾽ 
ἐφθέγξω.---εἰς σωτηρίαν ἐπεδίδοσαν, i.e. 
made contributions (ἐπιδόσεις, ἃ 1717) for 
the safety of the state. Such were made 
after Chaeronea, and again before the 
destruction of Thebes by Alexander : for 
the latter see XXXIV. 38, ὅτε μὲν ᾿Αλέξ- 
avdpos eis Θήβας mapper, ἐπεδώκαμεν ὑμῖν 
τάλαντον ἀργυρίου. 

4. τὸ συνειλεγμένον (sc. ἀργύριονῚ, 1.6. 
money contributed to pay some debt to 
the state which made him ἄτιμος, and 
thus to make him again ἐπίτιμος. Every 
defaulting public debtor was zpso facto 
ἄτιμος. From this allusion to Aristonicus 
(who is probably the one mentioned in 
§$ 83, 223), Schaefer (111. p. 136) argues 
that Demosthenes refers only to the 
contributions of 335 B.C., since after 
Chaeronea the decree of Hyperides re- 
stored all public debtors to ἐπιτιμία. The 
suggestion of Blass, that Aristonicus gave 
the money contributed for his ἐπιτιμία to 
the state after his ἀτιμία had been legally 
removed, instead of returning it to the 
donors, does not make his generosity so 
extraordinary as to deserve such public 
notice. 


ὦ tav, a familiar form of © 


wre 


ΠΕΡῚ TOY STEPANOY 219 


A ἴων ῳ Ν ἴω 
ἀπορῶν, πῶς γάρ; ὅς γε κεκληρονόμηκας μὲν τῶν Φίλωνος 
τοῦ κηδεστοῦ χρημάτων πλειόνων ἢ πεντεταλάντων, διτά- 
λαντον δ᾽ εἶχες ἔρανον δωρεὰν παρὰ τῶν ἡγεμόνων τῶν 
oS OE κ΄. 9 ΄ Ν Ν ΄ | 9» > 
συμμοριῶν ἐφ᾽ ois ἐλυμήνω TOV τριηραρχικὸν νόμον. | ἀλλ᾽ 313 
ἵνα μὴ λόγον ἐκ λόγου λέγων τοῦ παρόντος ἐμαυτὸν ἐκ- 

4 ’ὔ “~ 5 a) 3 9 Q > »¥ > 
Kpovow, παραλείψω ταῦτα. ἀλλ᾽ ὁτι γ οὐχὶ du ἔνδειαν οὐκ 
3 4 5 14 “Ὁ 9 Ν ἐς \ Ν 5 Α 
ἐπέδωκας, ἐκ τούτων δῆλον, ἀλλὰ φυλάττων τὸ μηδὲν ἐναντίον 
γενέσθαι παρὰ σοῦ τούτοις, οἷς ἅπαντα πολιτεύει. ἐν τίσιν ς- 
οὖν σὺ νεανίας καὶ πηνίκα λαμπρός; ἡνίκ᾽ ἂν κατὰ τούτων 
τι δέῃ, ἐν τούτοις λαμπροφωνότατος, μνημονικώτατος, ὑπο- 


κριτὴς ἄριστος, τραγικὸς Θεοκρίνης. 


6. γε κεκληρονόμηκας MSS.; γ᾽ ἐκεκληρονομήκεις A. Schaefer (Dem. III. 125), Bl. 


7. πέντεταλάντων (as one word, er united) 2; πέντε ταλάντων L, vulg. 


om. Ar (add. mg.). 
§ 313. ἀπέδωκας O. Ks 


σοῦ above line Σ. 


ὃ. δωρεὰν 


πολιτεύῃ MSS., Bk., BI. 


6. ἡνίκ᾽ ἂν... δέῃ D1; ἂν εἰπεῖν τι (bef. κατὰ) vulg.; τούτων εἰπεῖν τι 2, L, Ar; εἰπεῖν 


om, ΣΙ. Boe oe ΒΟΥ Υ̓ΓΕ Φ. 


6. τῶν Φίλωνος... πεντεταλάντων, the 
estate of your brother-in-law Philo, which 
was (sc. ὄντων) more than five talents. 

7. διτάλαντον ἔρανον, a contribution 
of two talents. There 15. ῬΡΥΟΌΔΌΙΥ a sar- 
castic reference to the common meaning 
of €pavos. 

8. ἡγεμόνων : see note on ἃ 103°. 

9. ἐφ᾽ ois ἐλυμήνω, for the damage 
you did: οἷς for a cognate a, as in § 18°. 
This attack of Aeschines on the trier- 
archic law was not made when the law 
was enacted in 340 B.C., but probably after 
Chaeronea. Demosthenes says (§-107°) 
that through the whole war (i.e. 340— 
338 B.C.) the naval armaments were fitted 
out under his law; and the statement of 
Aeschines (III. 222), ἐξηλέγχθης ὑπ᾽ ἐμοῦ 
ἑξήκοντα καὶ πέντε νεῶν ταχυναυτουσῶν 
τριηράρχους ὑφῃρημένος, shows that evi- 
dence as to the working of the new law 
in details was derived from actual experi- 
ence. See Boeckh, Staatsh. 1. p. 668, 
note 6: Schaefer ΤΙ. 527. 

ὃ 819. 2. λόγον ἐκ λόγου λέγων, 
by saying one thing after’ another.—rod 
παρόντος (sc. λόγου) ἐμαυτὸν ἐκκρούσω, 
cut myself off from (discussing properly) 
the subject immediately before us. 


3. ὅτι γ᾽ οὐχὶ δι᾽ ἔνδειαν οὐκ ἐπέ- 
δωκας, that 11 was not through poverty 
that you did not contribute; each negative 
having its own force, as the second is not 
a compound (G. 1618). 

4. ἀλλὰ connects φυλάττων to δι᾽ 


“ ἔνδειαν, both being causal.—gvAdtrev τὸ 


γενέσθαι: see M. T. 374; and note on 
§ 258°. 

5. τούτοις, οἷς: not simply Zo chose 
for whom (which would hardly be rov- 
ros), but Zo these persons (§ 3128), for whom 
(271 whose interest) ete. 

6. veavias, often used in the sense of 
vigorous, lively, like the adjective vean- 
κός : it occurs only twice in Demosthenes, 
here and ὃ 136}.---ἠνίκ᾽ av...te δέῃ: 
supply εἰπεῖν, which most MSS. insert 
either before or after κατὰ τούτων. 

8. τραγικὸς Θεοκρίνης : see Harpocr., 
Tov γοῦν πάλαι μὲν ὑποκριτὴν τραγικὸν 
ὕστερον δὲ συκοφάντην εἰκότως ὠνόμασε 
τραγικὸν Θεοκρίνην. Theocrines is 
the one accused in Or. πὶ (BL). Cf. 
§ 242% 5, 

In 88 314—328 the orator complains 
of the unfairness of judging him, as 
Aeschines has done (178—190), by com- 
parison with the great men of ancient 


315 βάλλειν ἐμὲ 


220 


ὟΛ Δὲ 


pa Ἰὴν Prov 


Εἶτα τῶν πῤότερον “γεγενημένων ἀγαθῶν ἀνδρῶν μέ- 


μνησαι! καὶ καλῶς ποιεῖς. 


"e > 3, 
οὐ μέντοι δίκαιόν εστιν, ἄνδρες 


ε , 
Αθηναίοι, τὴν πρὸς τοὺς τετελευτηκότας εὔνοιαν ὑπάρχουσαν 


προλαβόντα 


“ 4 
των TAVTWV 


Ἂς A a > c lanl 
τὸν νῦν ζῶντα μεθ᾽ ὑμῶν. 


> ε “ Ν 5 / 5 / Ἂν 
παρ υμῶὼν TT POs EKELVOUS ἐξετάζειν και παρα- 


, Ν > Ἣν 
τις γὰρ ουκ οἷδε 


J ἴω Ν lal nw [νυ , “ἡ ὔ 
οτι τοις μεν ζῶσι πᾶσιν ὑπεστί τις ἢ πλείων 


ἢ ἐλάττων φθόνος, τοὺς τεθνεῶτας δ᾽ οὐδὲ τῶν ἐχθρῶν οὐδεὶς 


5» ἴω 9 5 / lal P N - 
ἔτι μισεῖ; ἠἨοὕτως οὖν ἐχόντων τούτων τῇ φύσει, πρὸς τοὺς 


πρὸ ἐμαυτοῦ νῦν ἐγὼ κρίνωμαι καὶ θεωρῶμαι; μηδαμῶς: 


» \ , ¥ 5. Ὁ > ΄ὕ 3 \ \ \ \ 
OUTE γὰρ δίκαιον OUT ισόον, Αἰσχίνη, ἀλλὰ προς σε και 


» ¥ , A ua 2) , \ 
ἄλλον εἴ τινα βούλει TOV ταὐτά σοι προῃρημένων καὶ 


§ 314. 1. ἀγαθῶν ἀνδρῶν Σ,1,, Y, &, V6; ἀνδ. ay. vulg. 2. ὦ ἄνδρες vulg.; - 
@ Oils, lL, O, B. 3. τελευτηκότος O. 4. προλαβόντα Z, O, AT; προσλαβόντα 
ΤΠ ναοὶ τὸν νῦν ζώντα Σ,1,, O, Y; τὸν συζώντα vulg. 

8 315. 2. ἁπάντων V6, Stob. τοὺς δὲ τεθν. A2. 4. Ὁ οὗν om. O. 
TOUT WY ἐχόντ. V6. 5. πρὸ om. At. κρίνωμαι 2, B; κρίνομαι L, vulg. 
θεωρῶμαι = aA, Y, ©, B; θεωροῦμαι L, vulg. 6. ἴσον ἐστὶν Φ, A2. L has mpo 
(ὁ ἐ above) for πρὸς σὲ. . ὅντινα (for εἴ Twa) At. 2. βούλῃ Σ. ταντασὸι Σ; 
σοι om. Νό. προηρημένων Σ. 
times. But he shrinks from no compari- 24, 31, Virtutem incolumem odimus, 


son with his contemporaries. In §§ 321 
—323 he states two points, which he 
claims for himself, in the character of the 
μέτριος πολίτης. 

8 814. τ. τῶν πρότερον γεγενημέ- 
vev: in Ill. 181 Aeschines calls on the 
court directly to compare Demosthenes 
with Themistocles, Miltiades, the heroes 
of Phyle, and Aristides; and he. does this 
very effectively. 

3. THY... ὑπάρχουσαν, che devotion 
which wt ts to be assumed you feel towards 
the dead. 

4. προλαβόντα, securing for himself 
in advance, taking advantage of. Bl. 
refers to XIX. 277, TO πιστευθῆναι mpoda- 
βόντα παρ᾽ ὑμῶν els τὸ μείζω δύνασθαι 
κακουργεῖν καταχρῆσθαι. 

Dissen quotes [Cic.] in Salust. 11. 5: 
Quare mihi noli antiquos viros obiectare. 

..Neque me cum iis conferri decet qui 
iam decesserunt omnique odio carent et 
invidia, sed cum iis qui mecum una in 
re publica versati sunt. See Hor. Od. 111. 


Sublatam ex oculis quaerimus invidi. 

§ 315. 2. τοῖς μὲν ζῶσι... φθόνος, 
k.7.A.: cf. Thuc. Il. 45, φθόνος yap τοῖς 
ζῶσι πρὸς τὸ ἀντίπαλον, τὸ δὲ μὴ ἐμποδὼν 
ἀνανταγωνίστῳ εὐνοίᾳ τετίμηται.---ὕπεστι, 
implying more or less concealment: cf. 
§ 362. West. quotes Tac. Orat. 18; Vell. 
11. 0: . 

5. κρίνωμαι; am J to be judged? With 
the answer, μηδαμῶς, we must under- 
stand xpivwua in the sense, det me not be 
judged (M.T. 257): cf. Plat. Rep. 527, 
τιθῶμεν; with answer τιθώμεν. 
deliberative subjunctive is the interro- 
gative of the hortatory subjunctive, so 
that ἔλθωμεν; shall we go? is the interro- 
gative of ἔλθωμεν, det us go, the common 
connection of the two (as here) is most 
natural (M.T. 291). 

6—8. Here πρὸς σὲ and ζώντων were 
pronounced with special emphasis. Sup- 
ply ἐμὲ κρίνεσθαι. With προῃρημένων 
cf. § 309%. 


If the © 


PNG Lah fay lg a Mgt are asics 


ΠΕΡῚ TOY STEPANOY 221 


4 > “~ et 
ζώντων. κἀκεῖνο σκόπει. πότερον κάλλιον καὶ ἄμεινον 316E— 
ae / Ἃς a" A / ' 

τῇ πόλει διὰ τὰς τῶν πρότερον εὐεργεσίας, οὔσας ὑπερμεγέ- 
9 \ > ΕἾ ΕἾ ΄, N \ 
evs, —ov μὲν οὖν εἴποι τις ἂν ἡλίκας,---τὰς ἐπὶ τὸν παρόντα 
. p JNGRATITUOE  fBisivE TREATMENT ', 
βίον γιγνομένας εἰς ἀχαριστίαν Kal προπηλακισμὸν ἄγειν, 
“Δ ἴω ν > ‘4 “~ κ΄ 
ἢ πᾶσιν ὅσοι τι μετ᾽ εὐνοίας πράττουσι τῆς τούτων τιμῆς 5 
\ ΄ a δ \ 5 \ avs » at — 
καὶ φιλανθρωπίας μετεῖναι; Kal μὴν εἰ Kal TOUT apa δεῖ μ᾽ 317. 
3 A ε εἶ Ν , Ν ΄, 3 va ᾿ 
εἰπεῖν, ἡ μὲν ἐμὴ πολιτεία καὶ προαίρεσις, ἄν τις σκοπῇ, 
ἴω ye 3 “ Ψ 
ταῖς τῶν τότ᾽ ἐπαινουμένων ἀνδρῶν ὁμοία καὶ ταὐτὰ βουλο- 
, ’ὔ ε Ν Ν A la \ 
μένη φανήσεται, ἡ δὲ σὴ Tals τῶν τοὺς τοιούτους τότε 
΄ Ἂν ν > 
συκοφαντούντων: δῆλον yap ὅτι καὶ κατ᾽ ἐκείνους ἦσάν 5 
a , \ > 
τινες, οἱ διασύροντες τοὺς ὄντας τότε TOUS | δὲ] πρότερον γε- 
4 Ψ 4 , “ \ ἢ lan 
γενημένους ἐπήνουν, βάσκανον πρᾶγμα καὶ ταὐτὸ ποιοῦντες 
ood ΄ > , ε ὑδὲ Ψ , > 9 , ΕῚ , qos ’ 
Ol. €ELTa λέγεις ως OVOEV ομοιος εἰμι ἐκεινοις EYW; συ 318 


«δ᾽ ὅμοιος, Αἰσχίνη; ὃ δ᾽ ἀδελφὸς ὁ σός; ἄλλος δέ τις τῶν 


vulg.; before ἦσαν (5) &, Ar (mg.), V6; om. Σ, L}, Y, Ar. 


dat AM RHP - of Com § arazher 

8 316. τ. ἄμεινον, Αἰσχίνη V6. 2. πρότερον x, L, O, Ar, B; προτέρων 
vulg. οὔσας om. L. 3. οὐδὲ μὲν (i.e. οὐ μὲν) Σ, Y. 3. περὶ (for ἐπὶ) F, Lips. 
4. ἀχρηστίανΥ. 5. Τῆς οἵη. = (yp). παρὰ τούτων > (yp), L, vulg.; mapa 
om. 3, Y. 

8 917. 1. καὶ (after εἰ) om. At. 2. ὀρθῶς σκοπῇ L, vulg.; ὀρθῶς om. Σ. 
3. ἀνδρῶν om. Y. ταῦτα O. βουλευομένη V6. 4. Σ (yp) has ἡ δὲ 
σὴ + Tis © TWY...cUKOp.; τῶν τοὺς ἄλλους συκ. AT. 6. τοὺς χρόνους after τινες L?, 


οἱ διασύροντες Σ, L (ot), 


B, vulg.; of διέσυρον μὲν ΑΙ, of διέσυρον τοὺς ὄντας μὲν A2; μὲν om. Σ, L, Ο, F, 
V6; οἱ διασύροντες τ. ὄντ. τότε τοὺς προτ. yey. ἐπήνουν (om. δὲ), Reiske, Weil. 


7. ἐπαινοῦντες A2. 


8 818. 2. ὁ ἀδελφὸς >. 


καὶ ταὐτὸν V6; καταυτο ®, F (yp), Β' ; καὶ ταὐτὸ vulg. 


8 316. 3. οὐ.. ἡλίκας, 710. man can 
tell how great: οὐ μὲν οὖν, as usual, is 
emphatic and corrective.—éml τὸν παρ- 
όντα βίον γιγνομένας (sc. εὐεργεσίας), 
shown to the present generation. 

4. εἰς ἀχαριστίαν ἄγειν: οἵ. ὃ 1127. 

5. τιμῆς καὶ φιλανθρωπίας: cf. ὃ 209”. 

8 817. τ. εἰ... εἰπεῖν : he makes this 
slight apology for asserting even the fol- 
lowing claim to be compared with the 
great men of old, after disclaiming all 
comparison with them. 

2. πολιτεία kal προαίρεσις: cf. §§ 93”, 
192°. 

3. ἐπαινουμένων : imperfect, like ov- 
'κοφαντούντων (5), as is shown by τότε. 

6. Stacvpovres...éryvouv: 1 keep the 
reading of 2, but omit δὲ after τοὺς. The 


reading διασύροντες with τοὺς δὲ is too 
ungrammatical and needlessly awkward 
for this oration: διέσυρον μὲν seems an 
obvious attempt to correct this corrupt 
combination. διασύρω, ridicule, is a 
favourite word with Demosthenes: it 
occurs elsewhere in this speech in §§ 27°, 
126°, 180, 218°, 2997, 323°, always in the 
same sense. 

§ 318. 2. ὁ δ᾽ ἀδελφὸς ὁ σός: 
Aeschines had two brothers, Philochares, 
older than himself, and Aphobetus, the 
youngest of the family. He describes 
Philochares (II. 149) as a distinguished 
military man, who was chosen general in 
three successive years; and Aphobetus 
as holding a high position in the revenue 
department, and going as ambassador to 

ay 


222 AHMOZOENOY2 


ie ΥΝΝ 4 5 Ν bs) Ν 
νῦν ῥητόρων; ἐγὼ μὲν γὰρ οὐδένα φημί. ἀλλὰ πρὸς τοὺς 
ἴω Ss Ν ν Ν » > » Ν “ 3 4 
ζῶντας, ὦ χρηστε, ἵνα μηδὲν ἀλλ᾽ εἴπω, τὸν ζῶντα ἐξέταζε 
: ὦ Ν Ν \ 
5 καὶ TOUS Rae αὑτὸν, ὥσπερ τἄλλα πάντα, τοὺς ποιητὰς, τοὺς 331 
᾿ Ψ , A 
319 χοροὺς, τοὺς ἀγωνιστάς. |} ὁ Φιλάμμων οὐχ, ὅτι Τλαύκου Tov 
/ > A ; 
Καρυστίου καί τινων ἑτέρων πρότερον γεγενημένων ἀθλητῶν. 
> lal > ’ > ’ ; 
ἀσθενέστερος ἦν, ἀστεφάνωτος ἐκ τῆς Ολυμπίας ἀπῇει, 
2) > ν “ > , Ν 3 Ν + > > , 
ἀλλ᾽ ὅτι τῶν εἰσελθόντων πρὸς αὑτὸν AplaT ἐμάχετο, 
lanl Lay Ν Ν Ν Ἀ 
ς ἐστεφανοῦτο καὶ νικῶν ἀνηγορεύετο. καὶ σὺ πρὸς τοὺς 
νῦν ὅρα με ῥήτορας, πρὸς σαυτὸν, πρὸς ὅντινα βούλει τῶν 


ε ’ 9 Ἀπ 953." 
920 ἀπαντων" οὐδέν ἐξίσταμαι. 


3. ‘yapom. A2. 5. 
ery 2. 
8 319. 2. ἑτέρων om. ΑΙ. 


4" 


the king of Persia. Demosthenes (XIX. 
237, 249) has no praise for them, but 
casts no reproach upon either. It is 
generally thought that Aphobetus is here 
meant: see Schaefer I. 231. 

4. ὦ χρηστὲ, my good man, ironical: 
cf. 88 30%, 89°.—tva...elmw: this is gene- 
rally understood to refer to the gentle 
style of address in χρηστὲ, to call you 
nothing more: see West. and Bl. But 
it may refer to πρὸς τοὺς ζώντας (3), and 
imply that he will not press the slight 
claim to a comparison with the men of 
old which he makes in § 317: it will 
then mean, 20 claim no more than this. 

5. τοὺς καθ᾽ αὑτὸν : with πρὸς (3).— 
ὥσπερ τἄλλα πάντα, 1.6. as 27 other cases, 
less exact than τοὺς ἄλλους πάντας.---τοὺς 
ποιητὰς... ἀγωνιστάς, ie. as in dramatic 
and other contests of that nature, and in 
the public games. See § 319. . 

319. 1. Φιλάμμων is chosen as an 
Athenian who had recently returned as 
an Olympic victor. See the verse in 
Arist. Rhet. Il. 11, 13, ὥσπερ Φιλάμμων 
ζυγομαχῶν τῷ κωρύκῳ. Glaucus, on the 
contrary, was one of the most famous 
boxers of the time of the Persian wars, 
who, besides gaining a victory at Olympia, 
gained two Pythian, eight Nemean, and 
eight Isthmian prizes. Pausanias (VI. 


@ Y \ A , N 
ὧν, OTE μὲν TH πόλει TA 


καθ᾽ avrov Σ; Kar’ αὐτὸν Φ; καθ᾽ αὐτὸν O; κατὰ σαυτὸν 


4. αὐτὸν Σ; αὐτὸν L, vulg.; om. A2. 
", οὐδένα Σ, V3 οὐδένα (devi over δένα) L; οὐδενὶ = (yp), vulg. 


10, I—3) saw his statue at Olympia. See 
the fragment of the ode of Simonides in 
his honour . (fr. 8, Bergk): οὐδὲ Πολυ- 
δεύκεος Bla χεῖρας ἀντείναιτ᾽ av ἐναντίον 
αὐτῷ, οὐδὲ σιδάρεον ᾿Αλκμάνας τέκος. Aes- 
chines (111. 189) refers to this compari- 
son as one which he “heard that 
Demosthenes would make.” This is evi- 


‘dently a bold addition which Aeschines 


made to his speech after it was spoken. 
If Demosthenes had heard this antici- 
pation of his effective allusion, with the 
weak answer of Aeschines, he would 
certainly have replied to both in his own 
speech. The point of the comparison is 
slightly changed by Aeschines, perhaps 
to conceal its origin. 

4. εἰσελθόντων: cf. Soph. El. 700; 
Xen. An. VI. 1, 9- 

6. ὅρα pe: cf. θεωρῶμαι; (§ 315°) and 
ἐξέταζε (§ 3184). 

7. οὐδέν᾽ ἐξίσταμαι, 7 shrink from no 
one: this reading of the best MSs. agrees 
with Lobeck’s rule (note on Soph. Aj. 
82), that ἐξίσταμαι, declinare, takes the 
accusative, but in the sense of cedere, the 
dative. But here Lobeck would read 
ovdevi; and Shilleto agrees with him (note 
on XIX. 225), remarking ‘‘ obviously the 
sense is 7 yzeld to no one, as Aj. 672.” 
Recent editors are undoubtedly right in 


to 


ΠΈΡΙ TOY STEANOY 223 


βέλτισθ᾽ ἑλέσθαι παρῆν, ἐφαμίλλου τῆς εἰς τὴν πατρίδ᾽" 


εὐνοίας ἐν κοινῷ πᾶσι κειμένης, ἐγὼ κράτιστα λέγων ἐφαινό- 
A ~ \ rs Χ Ν 
μην, καὶ τοῖς ἐμοῖς καὶ ψηφίσμασι καὶ νόμοις καὶ πρεσβείαις 


9 “ ε aA 3 > Ν > 3 ἴω Ν 3 , 
ATAVTA διῳκεῖτο, υμων δ᾽ οὐδεὶς ἣν οὐδαμοῦ, πλὴν εἰ τούτοις ς 


> , Ὁ) 9 Ἂ 3. ἃ ,ὕ > » ra Ἀ 
ἐπηρεάσαι τι δέοι: ἐπειδὴ δ᾽ ἃ μήποτ᾽ ὥφελεν συνέβη, καὶ 
οὐκέτι συμβούλων, ἀλλὰ τῶν τοῖς ἐπιταττομένοις ὑπηρετούν- 
των καὶ τῶν κατὰ τῆς πατρίδος μισθαρνεῖν ἑτοίμων καὶ τῶν 
κολακεύειν ἕτερον βουλομένων ἐξέτασις, τηνικαῦτα σὺ καὶ 
τούτων ἕκαστος ἐν τάξει καὶ μέγας καὶ λαμπρὸς ἱπποτρόφος, 
ες a Cate ἈΝ ε A 3 3 + al ε ω » 
ἐγὼ δ᾽ ἀσθενὴς, ὁμολογῶ, ἀλλ᾽ εὔνους μᾶλλον ὑμῶν τουτοισί. 


§ 820. 2. αἱρεῖσθαι παρῆν A2. 
βέλτιστα At. 2. 4. 
τούτους Φ. 6. ὠφελεν Σ. 8. 
ὄντων A2. 9. 
It. Tovros B, ®. 


kal (after ἐμοῖς) Σ, L, O, Φ; om. vulg. 
μισθανεῖν (p above the line) 2. 
ἕτερον Σ, L, Y; ἑτέρους vulg. 


preferring οὐδένα (as above). For the 
dative see Soph. Phil. 1053, viv δὲ σοί γ᾽ 
ἑκὼν ἐκστήσομαι. 

§ 320. I. 
τιστα λέγων (3). 

2. ἐφαμίλλου... κειμένης : the figure 
of a public contest is kept up, the privi- 
lege of showing devotion to the state 
being a prize open to general competi- 
tion (ἐφαμίλλου). There is an active use 
of ἐφάμιλλος: see Xen. Mem. III. 3, 12, 
οὐδεὶς (χορὸς) τούτῳ ἐφάμιλλος γίγνεται, 
entering into competition. See also Plat. 
Rep. 433 Ὁ, οὐκοῦν δικαιοσύνην τό γε τού- 
τοις ἐνάμιλλον ἂν εἰς ἀρετὴν πόλεως θείης ; 

5. ἦν οὐδαμοῦ: cf. § 2το΄.- -εἴ...τι 
δέοι: the optative implies frequent oc- 
casions for insulting the people. 

6. ἃ μήποτ᾽ ὥφελεν (sc. συμβῆναι), 1.6. 
the defeat: see 288°, and note οὐκέτι, op- 
posed to ὅτε... παρῆν (1). 

9. ἕτερον: this is the vague term by 
which Demosthenes often alludes to 
Alexander: see ὃ 3231'8.—éféraots: the 
familiar military figure recurs, i.e. a call 
for these, as for a review; and this is 
carried out in ἐν τάξει : see note on § 173%. 

10. ἱπποτρόφος: the keeping of horses 
was a sign of wealth, and the word im- 


ὧν, partitive with κρά- 


3.. γὼ Kpdricta Σ, L, vulg.; ἐγὼ «τὰ 
5. nv om. F, Φ, 
ἑτοίμων 
ἐξέτασις ἣν vulg.; ἦν om. Σ, L. 


plies that Aeschines had become a richer 
and more powerful man at Athens since 
the complete establishment of Alex- 
ander’s supremacy. Cf. Ar. Nub. 15. 
There is also an allusion to the military 
review implied in ἐξέτασις and ἐν τάξει, 
in which Aeschines appears in splendour 
as one of the ἱππεῖς. 

11. ἀσθενὴς: Aeschines (159) speaks 
of Dem. at this time as ὑπότρομος, παριὼν 
ἡμιθνὴς ἐπὶ τὸ βῆμα. Westermann thinks 
this passage alludes to the time when 
Philip was made a citizen of Athens and 
his statue was erected in the city (Plut. 
Dem. 22; Paus. I. 9, 4). It more pro- 
bably refers to the recent honours paid to 
Alexanders see ΤῊ Att. Ii, no... 741, 
dated by Kohler in 331 B.c., fragm. f,g, 
στεφάνων δυοῖν, οἷς ὁ δῆμος ὁ ᾿Αθηναίων 
ἐστεφάνωσε ᾿Αλέξα[νδρον]. Kohler thinks 
two crowns were voted to Alexander, to 
elude a law forbidding the value of any 
crown voted by the people to exceed 
1000 drachmas. ‘These two gold crowns 
weighed 97 staters and one drachma 
(13 lbs. avoir.) and were worth about 
1950 Attic drachmas (silver). See Hist. 
§ 8, note 2. 


TO 


224 


321 δύο δ᾽, ἄνδρες ᾿Αθηναῖοι, τὸν φύσει μέτριον πολίτην ἔχειν 
δεῖ (οὕτω γάρ μοι περὶ ἐμαυτοῦ λέγοντι ἀνεπιφθονώτατον 
αις τὴν τοῦ γενναίου καὶ τοῦ 


Ἃ 


3 ~ 5 ο Ἷ δὼ 3 
εἰπεῖν), εν μὲν ταις ἐξουσί 


/ “A , / , > Ν \ 
πρωτείου TY πόλει προαίρεσιν διαφυλάττειν, ἐν παντι δὲ 
ς καιρῷ καὶ πράξει τὴν εὔνοιαν: τούτου γὰρ ἡ φύσις κυρία, 
τοῦ δύνασθαι δὲ καὶ ἰσχύειν ἕτερα. 
9 XN ἴω ε ᾽’ὔ > ε ἴω ε las “ 
) ἐμοὶ μεμενηκυΐϊαν εὑρήσεθ᾽ ἁπλῶς. opare δέ. 
μενος, οὐκ εἰς ᾿Αμφικτύονας δίκας ἐπαγόντων, οὐκ ἀπει- 
λούντων, οὐκ ἐπαγγελλομένων, οὐχὶ τοὺς καταράτους τούτους 33 
Ψ if , ἣ “ > % / 
ὥσπερ θηρία μοι προσβαλλόντων οὐδαμῶς ἐγὼ προδέδωκα 


§ 921. I. 
om. 2, LI. a 
τὴν om. Σ, 1, Ar, O; τοῦ om. O, V6. 


vulg.; ἑτέρα V6: ‘sc. ἡ Τύχη" (Π. Wolf). 

οὐκ eis αμφικτυονας δίκας 2; 

ἐπαγόντων μοι L, vulg.; wor om. 2, 8 Fes ae 
ἐπαγγελομένων L. 

προσβαλλόντων (προσ by corr.) =. 


§ 322. 2. 


(added above the line). 2. 
οὐχ ὅτι 1, (corr.), Φ, B. he 
>, L, O, Ar; pod. ἔγὼ vulg. 


8 321. μέτριον : see § 10’. 

2. οὕτω (with εἰπεῖν) : he uses μέτριος 
here modestly, as he is speaking of him- 
self; but he means the man called καλὸς 
κἀγαθὸς πολίτης in ὃ 2785 and 306% (see 
ΒΙ.). ' 
4. ἐν ταῖς ἐξουσίαις, i.e. ὅτε.. ἑλέσθαι 
παρῆν; 5320}, in time of ῥοτυεν.---τὴν.... 
προαίρεσιν, the policy which aims at 
nobility and pre-eminence; and τῇ πόλει 
διαφυλάττειν, 10 guard this always for 
the state. For τοῦ mpwretov see § 66’. 

5. πράξει (sc. ἐν πάσῃ) may mean 
in every act (of the statesman). But 
Blass is probably right in taking it in the 
sense of fortune, like εὖ and κακῶς πράτ- 
τειν: see Aeschyl. Prom. 695, πρᾶξιν 
"loos; Hat. 111. 65 (end), ἀπέκλαιε πᾶσαν 
τὴν ἑωυτοῦ πρᾶξιν ; and Soph. Tr. 294, 
εὐτυχῆ κλύουσα πρᾶξιν τήνδε.---εοὔνοιαν, 
loyal devotion to the state: so in ὃ 322°. 
See note on § 1734.—Tovrov, 1.6. τὴν 
εὔνοιαν διαφυλάττειν. 

6. ἕτερα, other things, as chance or 
Fortune, which he cannot control. H. 
Wolf read ἑτέρα, another power (1.6. 
Fortune), which he thus explained: 7 
Τύχη, ἑταίρα οὖσα καὶ Σειρὴν καὶ δραπέτις. 


AHMOZOENOY2 


ὦ ἄνδρες vulg.; ὦ om. Σ, L, F, V6. 
γεναίου (ν above the line) 2. 
6. τοῦ δὲ δύνασθαι At, O. 


΄ Ψ 3 
TQAUTYY. τοινυν παρ 
͵ O 


> 5 ’ 
ὑκ ἐξαιυτού- 


ταῦτα τὸν vulg.; ταῦτα 
καὶ τὴν τοῦ mp. L?, vulg. ; 
ἕτερα 2, L, 


οὐκ ᾿Αμφικτυονικὰς δίκας L, vulg. 

οὐκ ἀπειλούντων L, vulg.; om. Σ᾿ 
οὐχὶ Σ, L}, vulg.; ov Α2; 
ἐγὼ προδέδωκα 


So Blass: ‘‘verdeckter Ausdruck fiir 7 
Τύχη." -ταύτην : i.e. τὴν εὔνοιαν. 

γ. ἁπλῶς, absolutely, without excep- . 
tion. ’ 
8 322. 1. ἐξαιτούμενος, 1.6. by Alex- 

ander; see the next note and note on 
§ 41°. | 

2. εἰς ᾿Αμφικτύονας, before the Am- 
phictyonic Council: cf. ἐν ᾿Αμφικτύοσιν, 
XIX. 181 (also without the article). When — 
Alexander demanded the orators of 
Athens in 335 B.C., he doubtless intended 
to have them tried by the Amphictyonic 
Council : see Aesch. Π|. 161, καὶ τὸ πάντων 
δεινότατον, ὑμεῖς μὲν τοῦτον οὐ προὔδοτε, 
οὐδ᾽ εἰάσατε κριθῆναι ἐν τῷ τῶν Ἑλλήνων 
συνεδρίῳ. Notice the spirit of this sentence. 
What a trial this would have been for 
Demosthenes, Hyperides, and Lycurgus! 
- δίκας ἐπαγόντων, bringing suits (against 
me): see ὃ 249”. ' 

3. ἐπαγγελλομένων : cf. ἐπαγγελιῶν 
μέγεθος, ὃ 508).--τοὺς καταράτους τού- — 
τους, the whole pack of sycophants men-— 
tioned in § 249, Sosicles, Diondas, Me- 
lantus, etc. % 

4. προσβαλλόντων, setting them on 
(as θηρία) ; cf. προσβάλλεσθαι, Zo attack. 


TOY ZTEPANOY 
δ > eon ¥ ἔων ew 2 pol ἰ ris 
τὴν εἰς ὑμᾶς εὔνοιαν. Ἰτὸ γὰρ ἐξ ἀρχῆς εὐθὺς ὀρθὴν καὶ 
δικαίαν τὴν ὁδὸν τῆς πολιτείας εἱλόμην, τὰς τιμὰς, τὰς 


ΠΕΡΙ 225 


ὃ ΄ Ν > , Ἀ A , , , 

υναστείας, TAS εὐδοξίας τὰς τῆς πατρίδος θεραπεύειν, ταύτας 
¥ > 

αὔξειν, μετὰ τούτων εἶναι. 

ὃ Ν. 5 Ἂς > x Ἂν QA 5 Ἂς , 

μασι φαιδρὸς ἐγὼ καὶ γεγηθὼς κατὰ τὴν ἀγορὰν περιέρχομαι, 
Ν Ν ἃ 

τὴν δεξιὰν προτείνων καὶ εὐαγγελιζόμενος τούτοις OVS ἂν 


3 SON Ν -~ ε la > ’ 
OVK ἐπι μὲν τοις ετέρων ευτυχῆ- 


ἐκεῖσε ἀπαγγέλλειν οἴωμαι, τῶν δὲ τῆς πόλεως ἀγαθῶν 


5.. εὐθὺς om. B!, V6. 6. 
7. “τὰς (before τῆς) om. Y, F. 
ὃ 323. 4. ἐπαγγέλλειν B. 


τὴν om. O, Φ, A2, V6. τῆς πολ. THY ὁδὸν L. 


5. ὀρθὴν.. "εἱλόμην : cf. § 221, τὴν... | asked whothese men were. There were, 


προαίρεσιν. 

7. δυναστείας: οἵ. 88 6γ9, 27γο΄. δυνα- 
στεία means lordly power; and when it 
refers to a ruler, it often means adsolute 
power or despotism. But it can -also 
mean (as here), in a good sense, the 
lordly power which Athens once exercised 
over her dependent states, and which she 
always aspired to exercise.—Q@epatrevew, 
αὔξειν, εἶναι explain ὀρθὴν ὁδὸν. 

8. μετὰ τούτων εἶναι, to be faithful to 
᾿ these (τὰς τιμὰς...τὰς τῆς πατρίδος), lit. Zo 
be on their stde: see Ar. Ach. 661, τὸ γὰρ 
εὖ μετ᾽ ἐμοῦ Kal τὸ δίκαιον ξύμμαχον ἔσται. 

§ 829. 1. ἑτέρων, i.e. the Mace- 
donians ; as ἕτερος (8) and ἕτερον (§ 320°) 
refer to Alexander,—evtvxrjpact: the 
victories of Alexander at the Granicus 
(334 B.C.), at Issus (333 B.c.), and at 
Arbela (331 B.C.), were still fresh in recol- 
lection, the last not yet a year old. 

3. εὐαγγελιζόμενος, properly announ- 
cing good tidings (cf. εὐαγγέλιον, Gospel, 
but here congratulating on good news, 
_ eg. saying “ 7.125 25 a great victory.” It 
cannot mean actually 7/forming.—robv- 
Tos ods ἀν... οἴωμαι: the apparently 
definite antecedent is peculiar before the 
conditional relative clause. He means 
any of those men (a well-known class) who 
(on any occasion) / think are likely to re- 
port thither (to Macedonia) such an event 
as my congratulating them on a Mace- 
donian victory. Cf. § 313°, τούτοις, ois, 
where, however, the relative is not con- 
ditional. It has, I believe, never been 


G. Ὁ. 


of course, many Macedonians in Athens at 
this time, and there were many Athenians 
who would welcome news of Macedonian 
victories. But we must remember that 
the greatest Macedonian who ever lived, 
the philosopher Aristotle, was then a 
resident in Athens at the head of the 
Lyceum. His relations with the Court 
of Pella and with Alexander were most 
intimate. Who would be more likely to 
report to .Pella, or even to Alexander 
himself, that Demosthenes had congratu- 
lated him on the victory at Arbela, if he 
had any such pleasant fact to report? It 
would be interesting, though not quite 
pleasant, to find an allusion to the-great 
philosopher in this striking passage. 

4. τῶν.... ἀγαθῶν : these advantages 
gained by Athens may refer to the early 
successes of the Spartan king Agis in his 
revolt against Macedonia in the spring 
of 330 B.c. (Diod. XviI. 63). Though 
Diodorus says that Athens did not join 
in this insurrection, yet Aeschines (167) 
quotes Demosthenes as saying, ws ἀντι- 
πράττων ᾿Αλεξάνδρῳ, “ὁμολογῶ τὰ Λακω- 
νικὰ συστῆσαι. ὁμολογῶ Θετταλοὺς καὶ 
Περραιβοὺς ἀφιστάναι," which shows that 
Demosthenes at least claimed some share 
in this Spartan movement, as well as in 
the Thracian rebellion which occurred 
at the same time (Diod. XVII. 62). See 
Grote XII., Ch. 95. The words rév... 
ἀγαθῶν might also refer to the interest of 
Athens in the reverses of Alexander, 
which were occasionally reported from 


15 


5 


323 


+ 


226 AHMOSOENOY> 


Ν , > ἐν ων ν 
ς πεφρικὼς ἀκούω καὶ στένων καὶ κύπτων εἰς τὴν γὴν, ὥσπερ 
lal a Ν \ / 4 9 
οἱ δυσσεβεῖς οὗτοι, οἱ τὴν μὲν πόλιν διασύρουσιν, ὥσπερ 
> Tae Ἂς ed ν lal σι ΕΝ δὲ λέ Ε 
οὐχ αὑτοὺς διασύροντες ὅταν τοῦτο ποιῶσιν, ἔξω δὲ βλέπουσι, 
a ; ω ε , 3 ’ Ψ ξ 
καὶ ἐν οἷς ἀτὐχησάντων τῶν Ἑλλήνων εὐτύχησεν ετερος, 
an an ν Ν ν 7 » Ἀ 
ταῦτ᾽ ἐπαινοῦσι καὶ ὅπως τὸν ἅπαντα χρόνον μενεῖ φασὶ 
10 δεῖν τηρεῖν. 
a ἦν x + Law ft mee a > 4 
324 Μὴ δῆτ᾽, ὦ πάντες θεοὶ, μηδεὶς ταῦθ᾽ ὑμῶν ἐπινεύσειεν, 
4 Ν A \ £ 
ἀλλὰ μάλιστα μὲν καὶ τούτοις βελτίω τινὰ νοῦν Kal φρένας 
3 ΄ 3 τ Ae τ". 5 / 4 \ > Ν θ᾽ 
ἐνθείητε, εἰ δ᾽ ap ἔχουσιν ἀνιάτως, τούτους μὲν αὐτοὺς κα 
Ε ὺς ἐξώλ ὶ ὄλεις ἐν γῇ καὶ θαλάττῃ ποιήσατε 
ἑαυτοὺς ἐξώλεις καὶ προώλεις ἐν γῇ ῃ ποιή : 


5. ἀκούων ᾧ, B. σθένων O. 
βλέπωσιν (ov over w) L. 8. 
ér. nur. V6. 

8 324. τ. ὑμῶν ταῦτ᾽ O, Al. 
σὐτῶν om. 2, L, O, Y, Ar. 400: 


6. δυσεβεῖς Ο. 
εὐτύχησεν ἕτερος Σ, L, vulg.; ér. εὐτύχ. O, Art; 
9. μενεῖ D; péver.At; διαμενεῖ L, vulg.; διαμένῃ A2; διαμένει Φ. 
ἐπαινέσειεν Α2. 3. 
καθ᾽ αὑτοὺς Ο. vie 


καὶ ὥσπερ V6. 7. ἑαυτοὺς Ο. 


οὕτως ἀνιάτως vulg. ; 
καὶ προώλεις om. Al. 


ποιήσατε Σ, V6; ποιήσοιτε L3 ποιήσαι τε vulg. 


Asia: Aeschines (164) describes Demo- 
sthenes on one such occasion as ἐπι- 
δεικνύων τισὶ τὸ ἐμὸν πρόσωπον ws ἐκπε- 
πληγμένου καὶ ἀθυμοῦντος, καὶ χρυσόκερων 
ἀποκαλῶν καὶ κατεστέφθαι φάσκων εἴ τι 
πταῖσμα συμβήσεται ᾿Αλεξάνδρῳ. This 
was when it was reported that Alexander 
was shut up in Cilicia, and αὐτίκα μάλα 
ἔμελλε συμπατηθήσεσθαι ὑπὸ τῆς Περσικῆς 
ἵππου. But it seems less likely that Demo- 
sthenes would refer to such rumours in 
the present passage. The story shows, 
however, that the mere-report of a dis- 
aster to Alexander roused the spirit of 
liberty at Athens, even in her deep 
humiliation. ἡ 

5. κύπτων εἰς τὴν γῆν: cf. Caes. 
B. G. I. 32, 2, tristes capite demisso 
terram intueri. 

6. διασύρουσιν: cf. ὃ 317°.—dorep 
οὐχ with the participle shows that there 
is nothing conditional in the expression : 
see note on ἃ 2761. 

7. ἔξω βλέπουσι : cf. Plut. Arat. 15, 
ταῖς ἐλπίσιν ἔξω βλέπων. 

8. ἐν οἷς (cf. § 19%) belongs equally to 
ἀτυχησάντων and εὐτύχησεν. 

9. ταῦτ᾽, thes state of things (ἐν οἷς... 
ἕτερος), understood also as subject of 
μενεῖ. 


§ $24. The Peroration is confined to 
this single impressive sentence. As he 
began his oration by beseeching the Gods 
to put it into the hearts of the judges to 
hear him impartially, so now he implores 
them to change the hearts of the traitors 
within the State, or, if it is too late for 
this, to annihilate them utterly as. the 
only hope of safety to honest men. See 
Lord Brougham’s remarks on the perera- 
tion. ; 

2. μάλιστα μὲν, zf possible, best of 
all. * 

3. ἐνθείητε, may you inspire in them: 
this combines the wish with an exhorta- 
tion, which the optative sometimes ex- 
presses in poetry (M. T. 725). In the 
clause with δὲ we have the imperatives 
ποιήσατε and δότε : see critical note.—ei δ᾽ 


ap’, but if, as may be,—but of after all. _ 
αὐτοὺς καθ᾽ ἑαυτοὺς : the strongest ex- 


pression for dy themselves. 

4. ἐξώλεις Kal προώλεις ποιήσατε, 
cause them to be destroyed utterly and before 
their time: see Shilleto’s note on XIX. 
172, ἐξώλης ἀπολοίμην καὶ προώλης. The 


Scholia have: ἐξώλης ὁ ἄξιος ἀπωλείας, 
προώλης δὲ ὁ πρὸ τοῦ καιροῦ τοῦ θανεῖν 
Westermann quotes an — 


αὐτὸν φθαρείς. 
inscription of Halicarnassus from Keil, 


ἡμῖν δὲ τοῖς λοιποῖς τὴν ταχίστην ἀπαλλαγὴν τῶν ἐπηρτη- 5 


ΠΈΡΙ TOY ΣΤΕΦΑΝΟΥ | 227 


᾿ς μένων φόβων δότε καὶ σωτηρίαν ἀσφαλῆ) 


δότε vulg.; δόιτε (n over ι) Σ ; δότε over δοιητε L. 


§ ee Essay VIII. § 1. 


ἀσφαλῆ" +>. 


Sched. Epigr., p. 36: ἐξώλης καὶ πανώλης 
ἔστω καὶ γένος ἐκ γένους, καὶ μήτε γῆ Bary 
αὐτῷ μήτε θάλασσα πλωτή.---ἐν γῇ καὶ 
θαλάττῃ, i.e. everywhere, in all their 
ways. 

5. ἐπηρτημένων, zpending: for the 
passive of ἐπαρτῶ see XXIII. 140, τοσοῦ- 
Tos ἐπήρτηται φόβος. Cf. Aesch. I. 175, 
φόβους ἐπήρτησα τοῖς ἀκροωμένοις, 1.6. 7 
caused terrors to hang over them (im- 
pendere). (See Blass.) 


6. σωτηρίαν ἀσφαλῆ, safety which 
cannot be shaken. 

With these solemn but hopeful words 
of good cheer, Demosthenes leaves his 
case and his reputation with perfect con- 
fidence in the hands of the judges. Since 
the success of his burst of eloquence in 
88 51, 52, he has felt no anxiety about 
the judgment, and his courage has in- 
creased steadily in every stage of his 
argument. 


15—2 


— "» ‘ 
L 
. ‘ ~~ , 
> 7 7 , 
͵ f ! 
᾿ : ν 
+ + 4 1 
‘ 
- ι Ι 
* 
5 
4 
* 
Ἐ 4 
‘ 4 
ie ‘ 
᾿ 
“σε 
᾿ - 
~ ! 
. 
‘ . 
Ὶ 
u 
( 
ς * 
' ον 


BISTORICAL SKETCH 


FROM THE ACCESSION OF PHILIP OF MACEDON TO THE 
BATTLE OF CHAERONEA. 


I. FROM THE ACCESSION OF PHILIP IN 359 TO 352 B.C. 


1. The battle of Mantinea and the death of Epaminondas in 
_ 362 B.c. mark the beginning of a new era in Greek history. The 
brilliant statesmanship and military genius of Epaminondas had raised 
Thebes to the highest position as a military power, and had reduced 
Sparta from her leadership of Greece to a condition of extreme danger. 
Sparta was held in check by the new hostile towns of Megalopolis and 
Messene, and she had suffered for the first time ‘the humiliation of 
seeing an invading army within her streets. Athens, alarmed by the 
aggressive power of Thebes, thought it expedient to forget her ancient 
enmity and even her recent wrongs, and to make common cause 
with her old rival: at Mantinea Athens and Sparta fought side by 
side against Thebes. The death’ of Epaminondas at the moment of 
victory broke the spirit and the power of Thebes; Athens was suddenly 
relieved of her great alarm, and now no longer feared the removal 
of her Propylaea to the Cadmea of Thebes. Greece was left without 
a head, and Athens was encouraged to hope for a recovery of the 
leadership which she had lost by the Peloponnesian War. 

2. During the five succeeding years Athens devoted herself to 
establishing her power in the North, especially in her old dominion, the 
Thracian Chersonese, which, after a long struggle and many reverses, 
came anew into her possession in 357 B.c. Earlier in the same year she 
had made her famous expedition for the liberation of Euboea, of which 
Demosthenes often speaks with pride’, when she cleared the whole 

island of Thebans in thirty days and wrested it permanently from 


1 Dem. Cor. 99. 


230 HISTORICAL SKETCH. [350- 


Thebes, which had held it since the battle of Leuctra in 371 B.c. In 
357 B.c. the new Athenian confederacy reached its greatest power and 
extent. It included a large part of the islands of the Aegean, Byzantium, 
the Chersonese and the south of Thrace, Potidaea, Methone, and Pydna, 
with much of the coast of the Thermaic Gulf?. But in the autumn of 
that year the hopes of Athens were violently shattered by the outbreak 
of the Social War, in which Chios, Cos, Rhodes, and Byzantium, 
encouraged by Mausolus of Caria, suddenly revolted and weakened 
her power at its most vital points. This disastrous war ended in the 
spring of 355, when Athens was compelled to acknowledge the inde- 


pendence of the four seceding states. Thus crippled she found herself | 


in the face of a new and more dangerous enemy. 

3. In 359 B.c. Philip II. succeeded to the throne of Macedonia at 
the age of twenty-three. Macedonia had hitherto filled only a small place 
in Greek politics: there was no quarter which threatened less danger 
to Grecian liberty®, Under Philip this was suddenly changed. This 
crafty king lost no time in laying his plans for his great object, the 
extension of his power and influence over the states of Greece. His 
regular policy, which he never deserted and which seldom deserted him, 


was to interfere in a friendly way in the quarrels of Greek states in the 


hope of getting one or both of the parties into his own power. He 
began in the year of his accession by offering help to Athens in her 
dispute about the possession of her old colony Amphipolis. He pro- 
posed a treaty of peace with Athens, with the understanding that he 
would secure Amphipolis for her and receive Pydna (on his own coast) 
in exchange. These negotiations, though known to the Senate, were 
kept secret from the people of Athens*; but great hopes were based on 
Philip’s friendship, and Athens not only neglected to take Amphipolis 
when it was left ungarrisoned by Philip, but refused to help the town 
afterwards when Philip was besieging it and her aid was asked*®. But 


1 Dem. Iv. 4 refers to this time: εἴχομέν ποθ᾽ ἡμεῖς Πύδναν καὶ ἸΠοτείδαιαν καὶ 


Μεθώνην καὶ πάντα τὸν τόπον τοῦτον οἰκεῖον κύκλῳ. 

2 See Grote Χι. Ch. 86, pp. 310, 3253; Schaefer, Demosth. u. seine Zeit, I. pp. 166 
—I72. 

3’ See Grote XI. p. 279: ‘‘Among the hopes and fears of most Grecian cities, 


Macedonia then passed wholly unnoticed: in Athens, Olynthus, Thasus, Thessaly, — 
and a few others, it formed an item not without moment, yet by no means of first- 


rate magnitude.” 


4 See Theopompus, frag. 189 (Miiller); Schaefer 11. p. 20. This state secret | 


was the θρυλούμενον ἀπόρρητον mentioned in Dem. II. 6 (see the Schol.). 
* Dem. I. 8. 


353 BC.) ACCESSION OF PHILIP.—PHOCIAN WAR. 231 


when Philip captured the place in 357 he refused to give it to her, though 
he had again promised to do so during the siege’. This soon led to a 
war between Philip and Athens, called the Amphipolitan War, which 
continued about eleven years, until it was ended in 346 by the Peace of 
Philocrates. One of Philip’s first acts in this war was the seizure of 
Pydna, which was to have been the price of Amphipolis. He soon 
afterwards captured Potidaea, a colony of Corinth, then subject to 
Athens, and gave it to Olynthus, with which he was then forming an 
alliance. Soon after the capture of Potidaea (356) three messages came 
to Philip at the same time, one announcing a victory of Parmenio over 
the Illyrians, another a victory of his horse in the Olympic races, and a 
third t the birth of his son Alexander’. In the same year he founded 
Philippi, near Mt Pangaeus in Thrace, on the site of the Thracian town 
Crenides, to enable him to work the gold-mines of that region, from 
which he soon derived a revenue of over a thousand talents yearly*®. In 
353 he besieged and captured the Athenian possession Methone’%. 

“4. He now entered upon a grander scheme of intervention, of 
which perhaps he hardly suspected the issue. This was to end, after 
many years of unremitting exertion, in the bitter humiliation of Athens, 
the annihilation of an ancient Greek race, and his own instalment as 
a member (and the leading member) of the venerable Amphictyonic 
Council. About 356 B.c. the disastrous Phocian War between the 
Amphictyonic Council and Phocis had begun. It resulted from a 
quarrel between Phocis and Thebes about military service, in the 


τ course of which the Thebans and Thessalians induced the Council to 


fine the Phocians for some act of real or constructive sacrilege’. They 
refused to pay the fine, and the Council voted to treat them as it 
had treated the sacrilegious Cirrhaeans in the time of Solon®, by seizing 
their land and consecrating it to the Delphian Apollo, and putting the 


_ whole Phocian race under a terrible curse. The Phocians, under their 


1 Dem. XXIII. 116: Φίλιππος, ὅτε μὲν ᾿Αμφίπολιν ἐπολιόρκει, ἵν᾽ ὑμῖν παραδῷ 
πολιορκεῖν ἔφη, ἐπειδὴ δ᾽ ἔλαβε, καὶ Ἰ]οτείδαιαν προσαφείλετο. Cf. [ν11.} 27. 

3. Alexander was born (Plut. Alex. 3) on the 6th of Hecatombaeon (July 21), 356 B.C. 

ὃ Diod. xvi. 8: see below § 8, ἢ. 2. 

4 For Philip’s successive aggressions on Athens from 357 to 353 B.C. see Grote XI. 
331-536; Schaefer 11. 21—31; and Dem. I. 12, Cor. 69. 

5 See Paus. X. 2, 1: κατέλαβεν αὐτοὺς (the Phocians) ἕημιωθῆναι χρήμασιν ὑπὸ 
᾿Αμφικτυόνων" οὐδ᾽ ἔχω τοῦ λόγου τὸ ἀληθὲς ἐξευρεῖν, εἴτε ἀδικήσασιν ἐπεβλήθη σφίσιν, 
εἴτε Θεσσαλοὶ κατὰ τὸ ἐκ παλαιοῦ μῖσος γενέσθαι τὴν ζημίαν τοῖς Φωκεῦσιν ἦσαν οἱ 
πράξαντες. Schaefer 1. 488—490. 

6 See below, § 72 (end). 


Ce ee ae 


232 HISTORICAL SKETCH. [356- 


leader Philomelus, decided to resist ; and they revived an old claim to 
the management of the temple of Delphi, which had caused a short 
Sacred War in 448 B.c. At that time the Phocians, under the protection 
of Athens, had seized the temple and expelled the Delphians; the 
Spartans sent an army which restored the temple to the Delphians, soon 
after which the Athenians sent another army which placed the Phocians 
again in possession’. Athens was thus committed by her action ninety 
years before to the Phocian side of the question ; Sparta was herself 
already under the Delphic ban by her refusal to pay a fine imposed on 
her for seizing the Cadmea of Thebes in 382 B.c. 

5. Under these circumstances Philomelus with a body of Phocians 
seized the temple. The loyal Amphictyons, now chiefly Thebans, 
Thessalians, and Locrians, raised a large army to attack them, and they 
in turn raised a large mercenary force to defend the temple. After 
many promises to respect the sacred_treasures, Philomelus was soon 
reduced to the necessity of using these to pay his soldiers; and in a 
few years the costly offerings of gold and silver, with which the religious 
pride of Greece and the munificence of strangers like Croesus had stored 
this venerable temple, had been melted down to supply the needs of 
the Phocian mercenaries. Philomelus was killed in a skirmish in 3548.C., 
and was succeeded by Onomarchus, who continued the spoliation of the 
temple with still greater energy. He even used the bronze and iron 
relics to make arms for his troops. He and his successors gave the most 
precious relics, as the necklaces of Helen and of Harmonia (daughter 
of Ares and Aphrodite, and wife of Cadmus), to their wives or mistresses 
to wear; and Diodorus piously relates the sad fates which befel these 
unfortunate women’. ‘This state of things caused a scandal throughout 
Greece, which was_easily magnified by the enemies of the Phocians, 
and obliged even their traditional friends, like the Athenians, to be 
cautious in expressing their sympathies by word or deed*. The religious 
excitement also made it easy and attractive for an unscrupulous out- 
sider like Philip to intervene on the side of piety, and thus to pose as 
the champion of the God of Delphi. This Philip did at the earliest 
opportunity. 


1 Thuc. 1. 112. After the decline of the Athenian power the Phocians lost their 
control of the temple, and the Peace of Nicias (421 B.C.) recognized the Delphians as 


managers. 
2 Athen. VI. p. 232E; Diod. xvi. 64. 
* See the cautious words of Demosthenes (Cor. 18) on the feeling and the policy 
of Athens concerning the Phocians. For the earlier account of the Phocian War see 
Grote ΧΙ. Ch. 87, Schaefer 1. 488—s07. 


ΝῊ PAIJZ/P CHECKED AT THERMOPYLAE. 233 


6. He had already interfered in the affairs of Thessaly by aiding 
the Aleuadae of Larissa in their contest against Lycophron, despot of 
Pherae. In 353—352 B.c., soon after his capture of Methone, he 
attacked Lycophron with such vigour that the despot invoked the aid of 
Onomarchus and his Phocian army. The Phocians had now become 
so powerful with their ill-gotten wealth that they had marched forth 
from Delphi and were practically masters of Boeotia and of the whole 
region south of Thermopylae. A force of Phocians under Phayllus, 
the brother and afterwards the successor.of Onomarchus, who marched 
to the aid of Lycophron, was defeated by Philip, and compelled to 
retreat beyond Thermopylae. Onomarchus then entered Thessaly with 
his whole army, and defeated Philip in two battles. But Philip soon 
returned with a new army, and defeated the Phocians completely. 
Onomarchus, it was said, was slain in the retreat by some of his 
own men. Lycophron was obliged to abandon Pherae, which was 
taken by Philip, who also captured the important seaport of Pagasae, 
which gave him control of the whole Pagasaean Gulf. The Phocian 
army was annihilated; but Phayllus took his brother’s command, and 
- easily raised another mercenary force by offering double pay, which the 
sacred treasures still provided’. 

7. While this new force was collecting, the road through Ther- 
mopylae lay open to Philip; but he delayed his march southward until 
he could settle the affairs of southern Thessaly. Since his defeat 
of the Phocians he was hailed as a protector by their enemies, and he 
was already recognized as the avenger of Apollo, who was to restore the 
holy temple to its rightful lord; and it was-confidently expected that 
‘he would pass Thermopylae with his army and become a power in 
Central Greece. But at this momentous crisis Athens became fully 
alive to the danger which threatened Greece and _ especially herself. 
With an energy which was unusual at this period and recalled the most 
glorious of her older days, she sent a force by sea to Thermopylae, which 
was sufficient to prevent Philip from even attempting to force the pass, 
* and which (strange to say) arrived in time. Demosthenes often alludes 
with pride to this exploit of Athens, and compares it with her many 
expeditions which were sent too late» This took place shortly before 
midsummer,. 352 B.c.* Though Philip received a temporary check at 
this time, he was now recognized as a power to be reckoned with in the 


1 See Grote ΧΙ. 408—418; Schaefer 1. 505—510, II. 31—32. 
2 See Dem. Cor. 32, 1V. 17, 35, XIX. 84 (cf. 322). 
3 See Grote ΧΙ. 415; Schaefer I. 510. 


234 HISTORICAL, SKLTCH. [384-- 


settlement of the Sacred War; and he used this position with great skill, 
until six years later he was enabled to end the war on his own terms, 
to humiliate Athens, and by a single blow to make himself a recognized 
partner in Greek affairs. 


II. Eariy LirE OF DEMOSTHENES.—EVENTS FROM 352 TO | 
348 B.C. | 


8. In 354 B.c., two years before Philip was repulsed at Ther- 
mopylae by Athens, a statesman appeared in the Athenian Assembly | 
who was to be his most able and persistent opponent, and to whom | 
it was chiefly due that his plans for the subjugation of Greece were ᾿ 
delayed more than fifteen years. Demosthenes, son of Demosthenes, | 
was born at Athens, according to the date now generally accepted, 
in 384—383 B.c., the year in which probably Aristotle was born at | 
Stageiros'. The father of Demosthenes died in 376—375, leaving his | 
son in his eighth year and a daughter in her fifth. He left an estate of | 
about fifteen talents (£3000 or $15000)*, to be managed during the : 


1 We have the most conflicting statements of the year in which the orator was 
born. The date 384—383 agrees with what Demosthenes says in XXX. 15, that ὦ 
Aphobus was married in the last month of the archonship of Polyzelus (i.e. mid- 
summer 366 B.c.), and that immediately afterwards he himself became of age (18) and 
passed his δοκιμασία. It also agrees generally with his statements in XXVII. 4, 17, | 
and 29, that he was seven years old (ἕπτ᾽ ἐτῶν ὄντα), i.e. in his eighth year, at his 
father’s death, and that he was under guardianship ten years (before 366). It is ἡ 
confirmed by Hyperides (in Dem., Col. Xx1I. 5), who refers to Demosthenes (in 324 
—323 B.C.) as ‘‘over sixty years old.” It is directly opposed to Dem. XXI. 154, 
where the orator says that he is thirty-two years old (in 349—348): there is probably — 
an error in the text here: and this is repeated by Dion. Hal. (Amm. p. 724), who | 
gives 381—380 for the birth of Demosthenes. See Schaefer I. 269, with Beilage II. 
(1st ed.); Blass, Chron. Dem. (in Teubner ed.), p. 5. 

The lives of Demosthenes and Aristotle coincide almost exactly, as Aristotle died 
at Chalcis in the autumn of 322 B.c., a few weeks before the death of Demosthenes at 
Calauria. f 

For another opinion on these dates, by which Demosthenes was born in 383 and — 3 
the Midiana is dated in 350, when he was 32 years and 11 months old, see Unger ἮΝ 
the Berichte of the Munich Academy, 1879, II. p. 173. ΐ 

51 give the modern value of the weight of pure silver which made the Solonic — 
talent (57? 105. avoir.) at £200 or $1000, this being the average value for many years ; 


——— 


before the recent decline in the value of silver (see Lidd. and Scott under τάλαντον). 
This assumes a value of 57 pence per ounce Troy of pure silver, and 5275 pence per 
ounce of English standard silver (-925 fine). If standard silver were to fall ἴα 
26s'5 pence per ounce (Oct. 6, 1899, it was 268), the actual value of a talent weight of 
silver would be £100. ᾿ 


ee 


o** 


364 50} BIRTH AND YOUTH OF DEMOSTHENES. 235 


son’s minority by three guardians, Aphobus, Demophon, and Therip- 
pides. These faithless trustees mismanaged the property ten years in 
the most dishonest manner, so that the estate had nearly vanished when 
their ward attained his majority in 366 at the age of eighteen. Demo- 
sthenes immediately began legal proceedings against his guardians, from 
each of whom he claimed ten talents; but he brought only one suit to 
trial, that against Aphobus, the chief guardian and the chief offender. 
During two years he attempted to bring his guardians to terms by private 
negotiations ; and the young man hesitated long and anxiously before 
appearing in the courts against men of wealth and influence, with whom 
he must contend at a great disadvantage with his inexperience and his 
broken fortunes. All this time and even earlier he was preparing for 
the great contest. He secured the services of Isaeus, a jurist of great 
experience in the courts, who was deeply learned in the Attic law, 
especially in that relating to inheritance and the management of estates. 
According to one account Isaeus lived in the house of Demosthenes 
four years as his adviser’. 
9. At length, in 364 B.C., the suit against Aphobus was ready for 
- trial in the Archon’s court. But four or five days before the day of trial 
Aphobus tried a last desperate trick to compel Demosthenes to abandon 
his suit. Thrasylochus, a friend of Aphobus, on whom the duty of 
the trierarchy had regularly been imposed, came with his brother, 
the rich and powerful Midias*, to Demosthenes, and demanded that 
he should either take the trierarchy or accept ἀντίδοσις. This meant 
_that Demosthenes must either assume the trierarchy without further 
question, as if it were legally imposed on him, or else submit to a,» 
᾿ διαδικασία before the board of Generals to decide whether he was bound Ye "Ὁ 
to bear the expense rather than Thrasylochus, regard being had to their’. +» 
respective wealth and to the time since either had borne the burden. 
If this decision went against him, he must either assume the trierarchy 
or exchange property with Thrasylochus. ‘The first step in the process 
called ἀντίδοσις was an official sealing of both estates to prevent dimi- 
hution, and the suspension of all lawsuits the issue of which might 
impair the value of either property. This last was the real object of the 
whole trick, as it was assumed that Demosthenes in his poverty could 
not take the trierarchy, and that the time was too short for a διαδικασία. 
Demosthenes at first accepted the ἀντίδοσις, 1.6. he refused to take the 
trierarchy thus fraudulently tendered, and decided to submit his case to 


1 See Plut. Dem. 5; Vit. x. Orat. p. 8446. 
2 See § 15, below. 


a “νυν 


236 HISTORICAL SKETCH. [364--- 


the regular διαδικασία, in which he felt sure of obtaining justice. But 
the time proved to be too short for this; and he therefore was com- 
pelled to take the trierarchy, as the only means of bringing his suit 
to trial’. He paid twenty minae (one-third of a talent), the sum for 
which Thrasylochus had already hired a contractor to perform the duties 
of the trierarchy, which was a συντριηραρχίαἥ. | 

Though the estate of Demosthenes had been so grossly squandered, 
the crafty guardians had allowed their ward to be assessed for the 
property tax in the highest class, as one of the “leaders of Symmories.”’ 
This obliged him to bear all the special burdens of the richest citizens, 
including the trierarchy’. 

to. As was the rule in private suits*, the case came first before a 
public arbiter (διαιτητής), who condemned Aphobus. In the Heliastic 
court, to which he appealed, the result was the same, and Demosthenes 
was awarded his full damages, ten talents. In this trial he delivered his 
two orations against Aphobus (xxvul. and xxvu.). But he found it im- 
possible to obtain either his estate or his damages from his wily opponent. 
In attempting to seize a piece of land belonging to Aphobus he was 
met by Onetor, brother-in-law of Aphobus, who asserted that the land 
was his own, having been taken by him as security for the dowry of his 
sister, whom Aphobus had married and divorced. Demosthenes now 
brought a δίκη ἐξούλης, or suit of. ejectment, against Onetor, charging 
him with “ejecting” him illegally from land to which he had a legal 
claim’. In this case he delivered his two orations against Onetor (Xxx. 


1 See Dem. XXVIII. 17: ἀντίδοσιν ἐπ᾽ ἐμὲ παρεσκεύασαν, ἵν᾽, εἰ μὲν ἀντιδοίην, μὴ 
ἐξείη μοι πρὸς αὐτοὺς ἀντιδικεῖν ὡς καὶ τῶν δικῶν τούτων τοῦ ἀντιδιδόντος γιγνομένων, εἰ 
δὲ μηδὲν τούτων ποιοίην, ἵν᾿ ἐκ βραχείας οὐσίας λῃτουργῶν παντάπασιν ἀναιρεθείην.... 
ἀντέδωκα μὲν, ἀπέκλεισα δὲ ὡς διαδικασίας τευξόμενος" οὐ τυχὼν δὲ ταύτης, τῶν χρόνων 
ὑπογύων ὄντων, ἵνα μὴ στερηθῶ τῶν δικῶν, ἀπέτισα τὴν λῃτουργίαν ὑποθεὶς τὴν οἰκίαν 
καὶ τἀμαυτοῦ πάντα. Dem. accepted the ἀντίδοσις (ἀντέδωκα μὲν), but with the 
common proviso (ἀπέκλεισα δὲ) that a διαδικασία should finally settle the case; but 
Thrasylochus had skilfully left no time for this. See also xxi. 78. For ἀντίδοσις, as 
applicable to all forms of Ayroupyia, see Boeckh, Staatsh. d. Ath. I. pp. 673 ff. (esp. 
677), with Frankel’s note 883 (II. p. 130”). 

2 Dem. XXI. 80, 154. The whole trierarchy, of which Thrasylochus had one half 
imposed on him, cost forty minae. See Boeckh, Staatsh. d. Ath. I. 642, 671. 

3 Dem. Cor. 103? and note, XXVII. 7, 9; Boeckh, ibid. pp. 599—601, 613. 

4 Arist. Pol. Ath. 53, a passage which finally settles a disputed question. 

5 The δίκη ἐξούλης has many points in common with the old action of ejectment, 
on which see Encyclop. Britann. under Ejectment. See hypothesis to Dem. ΧΧΧ.: 
διόπερ ἐξούλης αὐτῷ δικάζεται ὁ Δημοσθένης, ws ἐκ τῶν ᾿Αφόβου πρότερον, viv δὲ 


ἑαυτῷ γεγενημένων, ἐξεληλαμέν ος....τὸ δὲ τῆς ἐξούλης ὄνομα ᾿Αττικόν" ἐξέλλειν γὰρ 


-«--- ... -- ,...... ὕ.ϑὕθὕ..-...ὕ..ὕβ...0θὸΨ0.00ῸΨ. 0. 


υἷα ——— να σοί, 


352 B.C. ] DEMOSTHENES AS ORATOR. 237 


and ΧΧΧΙ.), probably in 362—361. ‘The issue of this second suit is not 
known. It is certain that Isaeus advised and supported the young 
orator in all these suits, and he probably composed many passages in 
the speeches themselves’. 

11. The training in law and rhetoric which Demosthenes gained in 
preparing for this early contest, and his long experience in the various 
processes of the courts, were by no means lost. He found himself, at 
the age of twenty-three, mainly dependent on himself for support ; and 
he adopted the profession of λογογράφος or legal adviser, the duties of 
which included writing speeches for clients to deliver in court (whence 
the name). In the period from 360 to 356 B.c. he composed for clients 
the private orations numbered ΧΙ,., LI., and Lv.’ It is very plain, 
however, that Demosthenes soon aimed at something much higher than 
writing speeches and giving advice in private lawsuits. Before he was 
thirty years old he had distinguished himself as an advocate in cases 
of important public interest, in which the constitutionality of laws or 
decrees was judicially tested*. His arguments in such cases of γραφὴ 
παρανόμων (of which more will be said elsewhere) are those against 
Androtion (XxXII., 355—-354 B.C.), against Leptines (xx., same year), 
against Timocrates (XXIV., 353—352), and against Aristocrates (ΧΧΠΙ., 
352—351). But he had already twice appeared as a speaker in the 
Athenian Assembly, once in 354—353, when he delivered his speech on 
the Symmories (ΧΙΝ.), proposing a reform in the system of assessing taxes 
and equipping the navy, and once again in 353—-352, when he defended 
the rights of Megalopolis (xvi.) against Spartan aggression. In neither 
of these public speeches is there anything which shows that the orator 
was seriously anxious about the dangers which already threatened 
Athens from the north. It is impossible that less than a year before the 
First Philippic none of the forebodings which there appear should have 
been felt ; but probably Demosthenes thought that the moment for open 
and energetic speech and action on his part against Philip had not yet 
come. 


ἔλεγον τὸ ἐξωθεῖν καὶ ἐκβάλλειν Bia. ἐξούλης is therefore the act of evectment, which is 
charged as an offence, used like κλοπῆς in δίκη κλοπῆς. See Harpocr. s.v. ἐξούλης ; 
Smith, Dict. Ant. Zxoules Dike; Meier and Schémann 665—668. 

1 For example, a long passage in XXX. 37, which approves the examination of 
slaves under torture and has often been quoted as a reproach against Demosthenes, is 
found almost verbatim in Isaeus VIII. 12. 

2 For the dates of these and other early speeches see Blass, Chron. Dem. 
pp. 18 ff. 

3 For the γραφὴ παρανόμων see Essay 11. 


238 HISTORICAL SKETCH. [352- 


12. Probably the sudden panic about midsummer 352, which 
roused Athens to her energetic movement to Thermopylae (§ 7), gave 
the question of checking Philip’s aggressions a new and serious import- 
ance!. A few months later (Nov. 352) the alarming news came that 
’ Philip was besieging Heraion Teichos, a fortified post near the Thracian 
Chersonese2. Again Athens acted with energy, and voted to equip 
forty triremes, to be manned by Athenians, and to levy a tax of sixty 
talents. But a report that Philip was ill, followed by another that he 
was dead®, stopped these preparations, and nothing was done. Philip’s 
cruisers committed some daring aggressions on the coasts of Euboea 
and even of Attica. In the spring of 351 the Athenian Assembly met 
to consider his hostile behaviour, which was now a familiar subject. 
Demosthenes was the first to speak, and he spoke with no uncertain 
sound. ‘This earliest of his speeches against Philip, the First Philippic’, 
is an earnest and solemn appeal to the people to take decisive steps 
against an enemy who is every day becoming more dangerous. De- 
mosthenes is now thoroughly aroused, and henceforth the single object 
of his political life is to excite the Athenians to effective action against 
Philip. He now proposes a new plan for a permanent military and 
naval force, to supersede the spasmodic efforts of the past, which 
had generally failed of their purpose. In this speech he established 
his claim to statesmanship, on the ground of “seeing things in their 
beginning and proclaiming them to others”; and in his final review of 
his political life twenty-one years later he appeals to this with honest 
pride’. So far as we know, this great speech produced no effect’. The 
dull honest conservatism of Eubulus, who held the attention and con- 
trolled the votes of the Assembly, lulled the people into a dream of false 
security and prevented immediate action on each emergency. The 
policy of Eubulus was that of “peace at any price,” at this critical time 
a most disastrous one, of which he failed to see the danger. 

13. A few months after the First Philippic, probably in the autumn 
of 351, Demosthenes made his speech in the Assembly for the Freedom 


1 The opening of the First Philippic shows that, though Philip’s encroachments 
had been often discussed, no serious action had ever been proposed. 

2 See 1. 4: μέμνησθε br’ ἀπηγγέλθη Φίλιππος ὑμῖν ἐν Θράκῃ τρίτον ἢ τέταρτον 
ἔτος τουτὶ Ηραῖον τεῖχος πολιορκῶν. τότε τοίνυν μὴν μὲν ἦν Μαιμακτηριών. This was 
in Nov. 352, more than three years before the Third Olynthiac (349—348). 

3 See rv. 11: τέθνηκε Φίλιππος; οὐ μὰ Av. ἀλλ᾽ ἀσθενεῖ; τί δ᾽ ὑμῖν διαφέρει; 

4 See Schaefer 11. 73; Grote ΧΙ. 431. 

5 ἰδεῖν τὰ πράγματα ἀρχόμενα κ-τ.λ. Cor. ὃ 246. See Grote ΧΙ. 442. 

6 But see Schaefer 11. 76. 


Tee mo See 


348B.c.] ZLUBOEA.— DEMOSTHENES AND MIDIAS. 239 


‘of the Rhodians (xv.)’. The now penitent Rhodian democracy, four 


years after the Social War, sought help from Athens against the oligarchy 
which had been supported by Mausolus, who had recently died. The 
Athenians, however, could not so soon forget their grievances, and 
refused their help. 

14. Philip’s intrigues in Euboea soon made new troubles. Since 
the victorious expedition in 357 (§ 2) Euboea had been nominally in 
friendship with Athens. But after Philip gained control of southern 
Thessaly in 353—352 (ὃ 6), he constantly used his influence to alienate 


‘the island from Athens. In the First Philippic letters were read from 


Philip to Euboeans, showing hostility to Athens; and we hear of his 
cruisers off Geraestus*. Early in 350 the Athenians were asked for help 
by Plutarchus, a sort of despot in Eretria, who was hard pressed by his 
enemies and professed to be a friend of Athens. Against the strong 
opposition of Demosthenes, it was voted to send an army to Euboea to 
help him, under the command of Phocion. This expedition had various 
fortunes in a few weeks. Plutarchus proved treacherous, and the 
Athenians were for a time in great danger; but Phocion gained a 
decisive victory at Tamynae, the news of which was brought to Athens 
by Aeschines just before the Great Dionysia (end of March)*. Later 
Phocion returned to Athens with most of his army, leaving a garrison in 
Euboea to be captured by the enemy and ransomed. Affairs remained 
in this position two years, until a peace was made in 348, in which the 
independence of Euboea was recognized. Athens and Euboea remained 
unfriendly, until the intrigues of Philip in 343—342 (δ 58, below) again 
brought them into amicable relations*. 

15. The Great Dionysiac festival of 350 was important for the 
fortunes of Demosthenes. His tribe, the Pandionis, chose no choregus 
for this year, and he volunteered to take the duties and bear the 
expense of the yxopyyia. While he was sitting in the orchestra of the 
theatre at the festival, amid all the pomp and state of the ceremony, being 
a sacred as well as a public official, wearing his crown of office, his old 
enemy, the wealthy Midias (§ 9), came forward and struck him several 


1 Schaefer 1. 473—487. 

Dem. IV. 34, 37. 

ἢ Aesch. 11. 169—171; Dem. ΧΧΙ. 163. The chronology of this period is very 
uncertain: I follow Dion. Hal., and Schaefer 11. 79: 

4 In ΧΙΧ. 75 (earlier in 343 B.c.) Demosthenes speaks of τοὺς καταράτους Εὐβοέας: 
ef. Cor. § 234°. For the judgment of Demosthenes on the Euboean War of 350—348 
see Vv. 5. For the campaign see Grote ΧΙ. 472-481; Schaefer 11. 78—86. 


240 HISTORICAL SKETCH. [350- 


times in the face with his clenched fist’. This was not merely a personal 
outrage, but an insult to the state and to a great religious festival; and 
it could be dealt with only by the most public legal process. ‘This was 
the προβολή, in which the case first came before the Assembly for its 
preliminary judgment, and afterward, if the decision was adverse to 
the accused, could be tried before an ordinary popular court. The 
Assembly, at a special meeting in the Dionysiac ‘Theatre, unanimously 
condemned Midias. This adverse vote (καταχειροτονία) of the people 
was not a judicial condemnation ; it merely sent the case to the court, 
if the accuser saw fit to bring it there, with a praesudicium against the 
defendant, which would stand for what it was worth with the judges. A 
man of influence and wealth, like Midias, might easily, after the lapse of 
many months, put obstacles in the way of a judgment by the Heliastic 
Court, which would not be available in the public Assembly, held 
immediately after the outrage. It is not surprising, therefore, that the 
young orator, after his decisive victory over Midias in the unanimous 
popular vote, yielded to the advice of judicious friends and avoided a 
further contest with a powerful man, who could always give him trouble 
in his public career. He compromised the case, and received a sum of 
money as damages”. The existing oration against Midias (xx1.), which 
appears to have been carefully composed for delivery in court, was of 
course never spoken: its professed date (according to the chronology 
here followed) is 349—348 B.c.3 

16. A year later (in 349) Philip took a most important step in his 
grand plan by attacking the Olynthiac confederacy of thirty-two free 
Greek towns in the Chalcidic peninsula. In less than a year he had 
captured and destroyed all these, including Stageiros, the birth-place of 
Aristotle, and sold the inhabitants into slavery* Olynthus, the head of 
this confederacy, had long been an important and flourishing city, 
generally hostile to Athens, and before 352 friendly to Philip. He 


* For the affair of Midias and its consequences, see Dem. ΧΧΙ., the speech against 
Midias; Schaefer 11. 94—101; Grote ΧΙ. 478, 479. 

* Aeschines (III. 52) speaks of this compromise as a disgraceful proceeding: 
ἀπέδοτο τριάκοντα μνῶν (half a talent) dua τήν τε els αὑτὸν ὕβριν καὶ τὴν τοῦ δήμου 
καταχειροτονίαν. He is of course no authority for the price. 

3 See XXI. 13, where he mentions midsummer 351 as τρίτον ἔτος τουτί, as if he 
were speaking in 349—348. 

4 Dem. ΙΧ. 26: "Ὄλυνθον μὲν δὴ καὶ Μεθώνην καὶ ᾿Απολλωνίαν καὶ δύο καὶ τριάκοντα 
πόλεις ἐπὶ Θράκης ἐῶ, ἃς ἁπάσας οὕτως ὠμῶς ἀνήρηκεν ὥστε μηδ᾽ εἰ πώποτ᾽ φκήθησαν 
προσελθόντ᾽ εἶναι ῥάδιον εἰπεῖν. Cf. ΧΙΧ. 266: πρὶν ἐξελθεῖν ἐνιαυτὸν τοῦ πολέμου τὰς 
πόλεις ἁπάσας ἀπολωλέκεσαν τὰς ἐν τῇ Χαλκιδικῇ οἱ προδιδόντες. 


Ps 


7. 
348 B.c.] OLYNTHIAN WAR. 241 


- encouraged her in her enmity to Athens by giving her Potidaea, which 
he took from Athens in 356, having already given her the Macedonian 
Anthemus. But the rapid advance of Philip’s power in 353—352, 
which brought him to Thermopylae and almost carried him further, 
alarmed the enterprising city, and in the autumn of 352 she was in friend- 
ship, if not in alliance, with Athens’. In the autumn of 349 an embassy 
from Olynthus came to Athens, asking help against an attack from 
Philip, and proposing a formal alliance?. Athens accepted the alliance ; 
but nothing was done with sufficient energy to save Olynthus or any 
_ of her confederate towns. Three embassies came from Olynthus to 
_ Athens, and three fleets were sent by Athens to Olynthus ; the last fleet 
was still at sea when Olynthus fell. The city was captured, after a brave 
_ defence, by the help of traitors within the walls, probably in the early 
autumn of 348%. Many Athenian citizens were captured with the city’. 
_ With or before Olynthus fell the other Chalcidic towns, and the 
_ destruction was complete and terrible. Seldom had anything shocked 
the feelings of the Grecian world like this. Travellers in Peloponnesus 
_ (Aeschines among others) saw on the roads troops of Olynthian captives 
driven off to slavery’. 
17. During the Olynthian war Demosthenes delivered his three 
Olynthiacs, masterpieces of eloquence, full of earnest appeals to the 
| patriotism and public spirit of the Athenians and to their sense of duty 
and honour®. The wise prediction of the First Philippic, ‘if we do not 
now fight Philip there (in the north), we shall perhaps be compelled to 
_ fight him here’,” is now repeated in fresh words and with redoubled 
i _, force. No more powerful arguments were ever addressed to any people; 


1 Dem. XXIII. 109, εἶτ᾽ ᾿Ολύνθιοι μὲν ἴσασι τὸ μέλλον προορᾶν, κιτ.λ. Liban. ὑποθ. 
to Dem. I. (§ 2), ἀποδημοῦντα δὲ τηρήσαντες αὐτὸν (Φίλιππον ᾿Ολύνθιοι) πέμψαντες 
᾿ πρέσβεις πρὸς ᾿Αθηναίους κατελύσαντο τὸν πρὸς αὐτοὺς πόλεμον. Schaefer 11. 121 refers, 
to these negotiations with Athens; also to C. I. Att. 11. no. 105, of 351 B.C., which is 
| too mutilated to count as historical authority for an alliance. 
| ; 2 Dem. I. 2, 7. 

8 Diod. xvi. 53, φθείρας χρήμασι... Εὐθυκράτην τε καὶ Λασθένην, κιτ.λ. See Dem. 
VIII. 40, IX. 56, 66, XIX. 265. For the details of the Olynthian war, see Schaefer 11. 
124 ff., for the dates 156—159; Grote ΧΙ. 454 ff. 
fe See § 19. 

5 See the account given by Aeschines of his meeting the Arcadian Atrestidas 
returning home with thirty Olynthian women and children, Dem. XIX. 305, 306. See 
_ Grote XI. 505, 510. , 

-_. The traditional order of the Olynthiacs is defended by Schaefer 11. 159—165; 
τς for other opinions see Grote XI. 499—504. 
7 1V. 50. 


G. D. 


16 


242 HISTORICAL SKETCH. [348-- 


and yet the quieting influence of Eubulus and his party prevented all 
efficient and timely action. The Third Olynthiac has a forcible appeal 
to the Athenians to use the Theoric (or festival) fund for military pur- 
poses’, a measure which was never passed until shortly before the battle 
of Chaeronea. At the end of the Olynthiac war (348) Demosthenes was 


probably in his thirty-sixth year. All the public speeches made by him 
before the events of 346 have already been mentioned. 


III. THe. PEACE ΚΕ PHILOCRATES 
347-346 B.C. 


18. When Philip had destroyed Olynthus and the thirty-two Greek 
towns of Chalcidice, he naturally turned his eyes southward and be- 
thought himself of the land of his hopes beyond Thermopylae. Ex- 
perience had shown him that while he was at open war with Athens he 
could hardly hope to pass Thermopylae without a desperate struggle ; 
and for this he hardly felt prepared. Whether he had already planned 
the artful scheme by which two years later he entered Greece, hailed 
with acclamation as the champion of Apollo and the protector of 
Delphi, or whether he had some less pretentious plan in view, he now 
saw that at least a temporary peace with Athens was absolutely necessary. 
Even before the capture of Olynthus, envoys from Euboea had brought 
to Athens a pleasant message from Philip that he wished for peace. 
Soon after this, Phrynon of Rhamnus was captured by one of Philip’s 
cruisers, as he claimed, during the Olympic truce (i.e. about mid- 
summer 348). He was released on payment of a ransom; and he 
persuaded the Athenians to send a public envoy with him to ask Philip 
to restore his ransom money. Ctesiphon (not the defendant in the suit 
on the Crown) was sent on this mission* Philip received both 
Ctesiphon and Phrynon with great kindness and granted their request. 


Ctesiphon reported that Philip wished to make peace as soon as 


possible’. The Athenians were delighted; and it was unanimously 
voted, on the motion of Philocrates, that Philip might send a herald 


--- γυ Tid be ope rt peas Pei pr Aaa: nigel 


ite, rae Priel ein , — ..» τὰ 
ho 4. Κα, ρος wie me = 


es 


τ} 


and envoys to Athens to treat for peace. A certain Lycinus brought 


a γραφὴ παρανόμων against this decree, with a penalty of a hundred 


talents, on what ground we are not directly informed. Demosthenes 


1 Π|. 18—20. See Grote XI. 491—499. 
? For this and the following events of $§ 18 and 19, see Aesch. 11. 12—1I9Q. 
8 Aesch. 1. 12, 13. 


3275. PROPOSALS FOR PEACE—ARISTODEMUS. 243 


appeared as the advocate of Philocrates, and Lycinus failed to get a 
fifth of the votes of the court’, 

: 19. At about this time Olynthus was captured®. The consternation 
ἢ caused by this event did much to cause the almost universal desire for 
_ peace at Athens. Among the Athenians captured at Olynthus were 
_ Tatrocles and Eueratus, whose relatives appeared in the Assembly with 
suppliant olive branches and besought the people to rescue their kins- 
men. ‘Their entreaty was supported by Demosthenes and Philocrates, 
but not by Aeschines*®, The people were deeply moved by this solemn 
supplication, and voted to send the actor Aristodemus, who was pro- 
fessionally intimate at the Macedonian court, to intercede with Philip 
for the two prisoners*. This mission also was perfectly successful. 
Iatrocles soon returned to Athens, released by Philip without ransom, 
Afterwards Aristodemus, who was probably detained by professional 
engagements, appeared after a summons from the Senate, and reported 
᾿ς that Philip was full of kindness and wished both peace and alliance 
with Athens. Aristodemus was complimented by a crown, on the 
᾿ς motion of Demosthenes’. The return of Aristodemus to Athens took 
place after the beginning of the year 347—-346, the archonship of 
Themistocles, in which Demosthenes was for the second time a 
senator, the year of the peace of Philocrates®, 


. es 


ev 


1 Aesch. 1.14. In ttl. 62 Aeschines uses this support of Philocrates by Demosthenes 

__as evidence of an early collusion between the two. But Demosthenes might con- 

_ sistently help to remove a mere technical obstruction to this preliminary step towards 
_ peace. Even a vote forbidding negotiations for peace with Philip, such as Aeschines 

: | obscurely hints at (11. 13), could not have been a νόμος, which alone could justify the 

| papi παρανόμων. The whole process of Lycinus looks like a mere political trick. 

| Moreover, Philocrates was not yet discredited as a minion of Philip. 

i 4 Aesch. ‘i. 15. 

Be 3 Ibid. συνηγόρουν Φιλοκράτης καὶ Δημοσθένης, ἀλλ᾽ οὐκ Αἰσχίνης. This is said 

| ; after the condemnation of Philocrates. 

| ᾷ 4 See Grote XI. 516, 517: he compares this with the memorable scene in the 

3 Assembly in 406 Β.6., when the relatives of the men who had been left on the wrecks 


5 Aesch. II. 15—17. Demosthenes twice (XIX. 12, 315) speaks of the actor 
_ Neoptolemus, in connection with Aristodemus and Ctesiphon, as bringing deceitful 
_ messages from Philip. Grote (XI. 517) thinks that he was one of the envoys to Philip. 
_ But his may have been private messages, sent informally at about the same time with 
_ the others. 
π΄ - Though Aeschines (II. 14, 15) puts the first proposal of Philocrates for peace and 
his indictment (§ 18, above) at about the time of the capture of Olynthus (autumn 
of 348), he distinctly puts the return of Aristodemus from Macedonia in the next 


16—2 


244 FSTORICAL SKEICM [348-- 


20. In the previous year, after the fall of Olynthus, a significant 
movement against Philip was made by Eubulus, with the active aid of 
Aeschines, of whom we then hear for the first time in political life. 
The famous rival of Demosthenes was the son of respectable parents, 
who had been reduced to poverty in the Peloponnesian War. We 
cannot accept as historical either of the two accounts of his parentage 
and his youth which are given by Demosthenes’. Neither orator is 
authority for the life or personal character of the other. Like De- 
mosthenes, he was left to his own resources to earn his living; but he 
was less favoured by genius and by fortune than his rival. As a young 
man he was a play-actor and took many important parts, as that of 
Creon in the Antigone and that of Oenomaus in the tragedy of 
Sophocles of that name*. He also did service as a clerk, publicly 
in the Senate and Assembly, and privately in the employ of Aristophon 
and Eubulus*. His friendly relations with Eubulus were often of great 
service to him in his public life. He was strong and vigorous, had a 
powerful voice, and was a ready speaker. In all these respects Nature 
had given him a great advantage over Demosthenes ; but he lacked the 
steady rhetorical training by which his rival, even as a young man, made 
himself an accomplished orator’. Though he was about six years older 
than Demosthenes, he appeared in public life much later. He served 
in various campaigns, in Euboea in 357 and 350, and at Mantinea in 
362. 

21. On the occasion referred to (δ 20), probably in the winter or 
spring of 348—347, Eubulus addressed the Assembly against Philip, 
calling him the common enemy of the Greeks and swearing by his 
children that he wished that Philip were dead®. He proposed a decree 
for sending embassies to the Peloponnesus and all other parts of Greece 
—Demosthenes says, “all but to the Red Sea”—-to summon an 
Hellenic synod at Athens and inaugurate a general Greek war against 


Attic year, 347—346 (11. 16,17). Aristodemus must have gone to Macedonia early 
in 347; and ἐπῇει χρόνος (Aesch. 111. 62) covers nearly a year after the acquittal of 
Philocrates. The new movement of Eubulus and Aeschines (§ 21, below) probably 
diverted the minds of the people from peace at this time (see Dem. XIX. 12). 

2 Ci. XIX. 940, 2503. ΟΣ ΕΣ 0740, 

2 Dem. XIX. 246, 247; Cor. 180. 

3 Dem. xix. 70; cf. Cor. 162; Anon. Vit. Aesch. § 3, ovra dé am pbcheovor ὙΡαμ- 
ματεῦσαι ᾿Αριστοφῶντι καὶ μετὰ τοῦτον Εὐβούλῳ, κ.τ.λ. 

4 See Cic. de Orat. 111. 28: suavitatem Isocrates, subtilitatem Lysias, acumen 
Hyperides, sonitum Aeschines, vim Demosthenes habuit. 

5 Dem. XIX. 292. 


i 


SR git tty 


ed kodd 


name 


347 B.C.] EUBULUS AND AESCHINES. (245 


_ Philip. This measure was eloquently supported by Aeschines and was 


adopted with enthusiasm. Aeschines brought before the Senate and 
Assembly an actor, Ischander, with whom he had once played, and who 
professed to bring reports from friends of Athens in Arcadia. De- 
mosthenes says that Aeschines then professed to be the first Athenian 
who had discovered that Philip was plotting against the Greeks and 
corrupting leading men in Arcadia’. Aeschines was one of the envoys 
sent out; and on his return from Arcadia he repeated the many fine 
speeches which he had made in behalf of Athens before the great 
Arcadian assembly called the Ten Thousand (οἱ μύριοι) at Megalopolis®, 
where he attacked Hieronymus, a partizan of Philip, a reputed scholar 
of Isocrates, who opposed him*. Demosthenes appears to have taken 
no interest in these embassies, of which he speaks in a disparaging tone. 
He probably distrusted any movement in which men like Eubulus were 
the leaders, and experience had shown him that the grand plan of 
uniting all Greece in a war against Philip would end in failure and 
give Philip fresh encouragement for conquest. The event’ proved 
Demosthenes right. No Hellenic synod met in Athens, and within a 
year Eubulus and Aeschines were both playing into Philip’s hands. It 
must be remembered that the “still absent envoys,” who play so im- 
portant a part in the story of the peace (as told by Aeschines in 330B,c.), 
for whose return Demosthenes is said to have refused to delay the 
negotiations for peace, are these very messengers of war’. 

22. But whatever the Athenians may have thought of the jingoism 


of Aeschines and Eubulus at this time, there can be no doubt that a year 


later (347346) the prospect of an honourable peace with Philip was 
extremely welcome to all sober-minded men at Athens. Her recent 
losses and disasters secured a favourable hearing for the friendly 
messages from Pella. There.can be no doubt that Demosthenes then 
felt strongly inclined to peace, as a matter of policy; and it is hardly 


1 Dem. XIX. 10, 303, 304. For Ischander see Harpocr., and Schaefer I. 246—248. 

2 Doubtless in the Thersilion, the great hall in which the Arcadian Assembly met, 
adjoining the theatre of Megalopolis, excavated by the British School at Athens in . 
1890—91. See Supplem. Papers of the Hellenic Society I., with plates. 

3 Dem. XIX. 11, with Schol. (p. 344, 8); Aesch. 11. 157. See Schaefer 11. 169g— 
172; Grote XI. 508—s511. It was on this mission to Arcadia that Aeschines met 
Atrestidas with his Olympian captives (δ 16, above). 

4 See § 32 (below); Aesch. 11. 57, ἵνα κοινῇ καὶ πολεμοῖεν, ef δέοι, Φιλίππῳ μετ’ 
᾿Αθηναίων, καὶ τῆς εἰρήνης, εἰ τοῦτο εἷναι δοκοίη συμφέρον, μετέχοιεν. Cf. Aesch. III. 
58, 64, 68: though he now always includes eventual peace as one of the objects, yet 
παρακαλοῦντες ἐπὶ Φίλιππον (68) still emphasizes the hostile character of the missions. 


246 HISTORICAL SKETCH. [Feb., 


possible that he had yet begun: to suspect the crafty scheme by which 
peace with Philip would be turned to the disgrace of Athens and the 
triumph of her bitterest foes’. And yet it seems hardly possible that 
the terrible spectre of the Sacred War, just beyond their borders, 
should not have filled all sober Athenians with alarm, especially when 
they remembered Philip’s march to Thermopylae five years before. 
Philip, himself, we may be sure, never lost sight of the prize which 
had once seemed within his grasp. 

r 23. Since Philip’s repulse from Thermopylae in 352, the Sacred 
War had been waged with increasing bitterness, but with no prospect of 
a conclusion. In 351 the death of Phayllus left the leadership to 
Phalaecus, son of Onomarchus (§ 6), a mere boy, who at first had a 
guardian and military adviser, appointed by his uncle Phayllus. The 
Thebans were now the chief opponents of the Phocians, and Boeotia 
became the chief seat of war. Neither side gained any decisive 
advantage. At one time the Phocians held three fortresses in Boeotia, 
Orchomenus (the ancient Minyan stronghold), Coronea, and Corsiae. 
But the resources of both parties were now exhausted. The Thebans 
called on Philip for help; but he sent only a few soldiers, wishing to 
check their “ Leuctric pride.” The Great King sent them 300 talents 
of silver. The Phocians had come to the end of the Delphic treasures, 
after robbing the temple of gold and silver of the value of about 
10,000 talents. They received help from various Greek states, including 
Iooo men from Sparta and 2000 from Achaea. It is probable that their 
army never fell below 10,000°%. 


24. The Phocians were now anxious lest a new invasion from — 


Thessaly with help from Philip might suddenly end their power. Their 
army was mutinous from lack of pay, and the authority over it which re- 
mained was divided. Envoys were sent to Athens asking help, and offering 
the Athenians the towns commanding the pass of Thermopylae,—Alponus, 
Thronium, and Nicaea. This offer pleased the Athenians greatly; and 
they ordered Proxenus to take possession of the three towns, and voted 


* A few years later Demosth. admits that the Athenians (doubtless including 
himself) were deceived by Philip’s friendly messages: cf. XIX. 12, τῶν ἐκεῖθεν 
ἀπαγγελλόντων οὐδ᾽ ὁτιοῦν ὑγιές. There is no inconsistency between this judgment 


after the facts and his proposing a crown for Aristodemus when he brought back one — 


of these very messages (Aesch. 11. 17). 
2 Diod. xvi. 58. 


* The Phocian force which surrendered to Philip in 346 numbered over 10,000: ἢ ' 


see Dem. XIX. 230. For the events of the Phocian war above briefly mentioned, see 
Schaefer 11. 180—192; Grote XI. 519—521, with the authorities cited. 


oo WPS 4 
5 


πο να, 


oJ 


—* 
= 


3468.) FIRST EMBASSY SENT TO PHILIP. 247 


- to call out the citizen soldiers up to the age of thirty and to man fifty 
_ triremes. But Proxenus now found men in authority at Thermopylae who 
_ repudiated the message sent to Athens, and the envoys themselves were 
in prison for making the offer. Proxenus was dismissed with insult, and 
᾿ _ the fleet and army were never sent. The Phocians remained in pos- 
session of Thermopylae, confident of their ability to hold it. A friendly 

offer of Sparta to garrison the pass was also rejected with insult. In 

spite of her discouraging repulse, Athens felt that the fate of Greece 
_ depended on having Thermopylae held secure against any invasion 
_ from the North. Notwithstanding the sacrilegious plundering of Delphi, 
_ which no one ventured to approve openly, Athens had the strongest 
3 political reasons, which were easily reinforced by moral motives, for 
Ϊ protecting the Phocians, especially against Philip*. A formal alliance 
Η had existed for many years between Athens and Phocis’, and it was 
naturally assumed at Athens (except by Philip’s friends) that peace with 
_ Philip would protect the Phocians against all danger from him. Prox- 
a enus was all this time with his fleet north of Euboea. It was probably 
in this spirit that Athens received the friendly propositions which 
_ Aristodemus brought from Philip*. 

25. Soon after the cordial reception of Aristodemus (§ 19), Philocrates, 
supported by Eubulus and Cephisophon, proposed a decree for sending 
ten ambassadors to Philip, to discuss terms of peace and to ask him 
_ to send ambassadors to Athens with full powers to negotiate’. The 
_ following were sent: Philocrates (the mover), Demosthenes, Aeschines, 
᾿ ἢ Ctesiphon (the former envoy to Philip), Phrynon, Iatrocles, Aristo- 
demus, Nausicles, Cimon, Dercylus*. To these Aglaocreon of Tenedos 
_was afterwards added by the Assembly as a representative of the allies. 
The embassy was appointed and sent in February, 346 Bc.’ It is 
_ difficult and often impossible to give a trustworthy account of the events 
_ from the sending of the first embassy to the return of the second in 


1 See Aesch. 11. 132—134. 

2 The mixed feelings of Athens are well described by Demosthenes, Cor. 182-4. 

% Dem. xIx. 61, 62: cf. Aesch.-111. 118. 

4 See ὃ 19 (end). 

Dem. Cor: X1x. 95. 
__ © The ten names are given in the second ὑπόθεσις to Dem. ΧΙΧ. p. 3361. All 
x } except Nausicles are mentioned in Aesch. II. 8, 19, 20, 21, 42, 473 for Nausicles see 
‘I. 18, for Aglaocreon 11. 20. 
i [1 7 This date is fixed by the return of the embassy about the first of Elaphebolion 
(March 28): we may allow from 30 to 50 days for the time of absence. The second 
7 embassy, which Demosthenes charges with criminal waste of time, was absent less 
an 70 days. See Schaefer 11. 194, n. 3. 


248 HISTORICAL SKETCH. [March, 


July. We generally have to depend on the testimony of either Demos- 
thenes or Aeschines, or on the contradictory statements of both; and 
these are given in the arguments of the lawsuits of 343 and 330 B.C., in 
which the two witnesses are the opposing speakers. Demosthenes is, 
however, fairly entitled to greater credence ; for there is no fact stated 
by him which can be proved to be positively and intentionally false by 
other evidence, while several of the strongest statements of Aeschines 
are proved to be absolutely false by his own previous or later accounts : 
of the same transactions. 

26. We depend chiefly on Aeschines for the account of the first 
embassy’; and there is little doubt that, due allowance being made for 
exaggerations and prejudiced views of the behaviour of Demosthenes, 
this is in general substantially correct. According to this, on the 
journey to Pella Demosthenes made _ himself disagreeable to his col- 
leagues, and boasted loudly of the way in which he meant to stop 
Philip’s mouth®. The envoys went by land to Oreus, in the north of 
Euboea, and thence by sea to Halus, on the south side of the Gulf of 
Pagasae, a town claimed by Athens as an ally*, Parmenio, Philip’s 
general, was then besieging Halus, which Philip wanted to give to his 
friends the Pharsalians. ‘The embassy passed through the Macedonian 
camp to Pagasae, Larissa, and Pella*. On arriving at Pella, the envoys 
were courteously received by Philip at a formal interview, in which they 
addressed the king in the order of their ages, Demosthenes speaking 
last, directly after Aeschines. Aeschines says nothing of the speeches 
which preceded his ; but he devotes the greater part of his story to his 
own eloquent argument, in which (as he says) he made a powerful 
appeal to Philip in defence of the right of Athens to Amphipolis, 
reminding him of the early history of the town, and going back to the 
children of Theseus. He spoke of the appointment of Iphicrates as 
the Athenian commander there, and reminded Philip of the occasion 


SS Wee 


* See Aesch. 11. 20—43. The account of the two embassies to Philip and of the i 
negotiations for peace is given in Grote x1. Ch. 89, and Schaefer 11. Buch 3, Ch. 5, 
Buch 4, Ch. 1; and no further general references to these will be necessary. As the 
first embassy had no power to negotiate, the details of its conduct are less important. __ 

? Aesch. Il. 21: ὥστε ἀπορράψειν τὸ Φιλίππου στόμα ὁλοσχοίνῳ ἀβρόχῳ, he would — 
sew up hrs mouth with an unsoaked rush, i.e. with no great trouble. 

* Philip thought it necessary to specify in his proposed terms of peace that Halus 
should be excluded from the allies of Athens: see Dem. xIx. 1 59, 174, and § 33 
(below). 

* Strabo, p. 433; Dem. ΧΙΧ. 163: ἀπῆραν διὰ τοῦ πολεμίου στρατεύματος. This 
siege of Halus, after negotiations for peace were begun, illustrates Dem. Cor. 26. 


346 B.C.] RETURN OF FIRST EMBASSY. 249 


\ 


_ when his mother, Eurydice, placed him with his brother Perdiccas (both 


children) on the knees of Iphicrates, and begged the general to treat her 
two boys with brotherly affection, as their father Amyntas had adopted 
him as a son. This harangue about a matter which had been settled 
more than ten years shows how Aeschines failed to see the real questions 
at issue, or possibly how he carefully avoided all questions which it 
would be unpleasant to Philip to discuss, i.e. all real questions. He 
could hardly have imagined that Philip would allow his title to Amphipolis 
to be called in question at this time. 

27. Aeschines then describes the appearance of Demosthenes before 
‘Philip. He was (we are told) so embarrassed that he could hardly utter 
a word; and after a few vain attempts to speak, he became silent. 
Philip encouraged him and tried to relieve his embarrassment, but all in 
vain. He remained speechless, and the herald conducted the embassy 
from the royal presence. This account is probably much exaggerated ; 
but it is hardly possible that the whole story is an invention. Grote is 
probably right in thinking that Demosthenes was taken with a kind of 
“stage fright ” when he suddenly found himself formally addressing the 
king © whom he had so often denounced, and when he was probably 
insulted by the officers of Philip who were in attendance at the palace 
on this ceremonious occasion, so that he may well have been physically 
unable to speak". It is significant that Demosthenes does not mention 
his own speech or that of Aeschines. Philip soon recalled the embassy, 


᾽ and replied to their arguments, especially those of Aeschines, but made 


_ no allusion to Demosthenes*. He ended his address with the usual 
᾿ ἢ ὐταποεβ of friendship. Most of the envoys were struck by the dignity, 


wit, and gracious manners of Philip, and by his skill in replying to what 


had just been said to him*. 
28. The returning envoys arrived in Athens about the first of 
_ Elaphebolion (March 28) 346 8.c.* They made their regular reports 


1 Grote XI. 530. Schaefer (11. 202—205) has little faith in the whole tale of 
Aeschines about the interview with Philip. Strangely enough Demosthenes (XIX. 253) 
reports Aeschines as telling the Assembly (apparently on his return from the first 


_ embassy) that he said nothing to Philip about Amphipolis, but left the subject to 


Demosthenes. It seems incredible that Aeschines could have repudiated a speech 
just made, which a few years later he reports at length, partly verbatim; and equally 


__ incredible that Demosthenes could forget or overlook such an occasion as his first 


interview with Philip. The evidence here is conflicting, but unimportant. 
2 Plutarch (Dem. 16) says that Philip replied to Demosthenes μετὰ πλείστης 


᾿ς ἐπιμελείας! 


ὃ Aesch. 11. 41—43: cf. 51, 52. 
4 See § 25 (above), n. 7, and ὃ 29 (below). 


250 HISTORICAL SKETCH. [ April, 


to the Senate and the Assembly; and they received the regular com- 
plimentary votes and the invitation to dinner in the Prytaneum, on the 
motion of Demosthenes as senator. They brought home a letter from 
Philip, expressing great friendship and his hope of both’ peace and 
alliance’. There can be no doubt that Demosthenes returned fully 
persuaded that some peace should be made as soon as possible, to settle 
the important questions which the war kept open”. Down to this time 
—in fact, until the nineteenth of Elaphebolion—he had no suspicion of 
the loyalty and political honesty of Aeschines*. There can be little 
doubt that Philocrates was already secured for Philip’s interest ; and it 
was not long before Aeschines (perhaps honestly at first) was acting 
with him to gain Philip’s ends. 

29. Immediately after the return of the embassy, Demosthenes 
proposed two decrees in the Senate to secure peace at the earliest 
moment. The Great Dionysiac festival was approaching, during which 
all public business would be suspended. These decrees enacted that | 
safe-conduct should be granted to Philip’s envoys and herald, who were 
now on their way to Athens, and that the Prytanes should call a special 
meeting of the Assembly, to be held on the eighth of Elaphebolion 
(April 5) if Philip’s embassy should then have arrived, to discuss terms 
of peace. The envoys came too late for this day ; but after their arrival — 
Demosthenes proposed another decree appointing the eighteenth and 
nineteenth of Elaphebolion (April 15 and 16) for two meetings, in which 
both peace and alliance with Philip should be considered. It was further | 
voted that the first meeting should be given to debate, and that in the 
second the votes should be taken without discussion’. The usual result _ 
followed, and speeches were made in both meetings. ee 

30. ‘The two meetings were held on the appointed days, after the 
Dionysia. The Macedonian envoys, Antipater, Parmenio, and probably 
Eurylochus, were present during a part of the sessions®. Demosthenes, 


1 Aesch. 11. 45, 46, 50; Dem. XIX. 40, 41. 

* Aesch. Ill. 63: κἀκεῖθεν ἐπανήκων ἐπαινέτης ἣν τῆς εἰρήνης, K.T.r. 

5 Dem. XIX. 13: καὶ μέχρι τοῦ δεῦρ᾽ ἐπανελθεῖν ἀπὸ τῆς πρώτης πρεσβείας ἐμὲ... ὲ 
διεφθαρμένος καὶ πεπρακὼς ἑαυτὸν ἐλάνθανεν. The remainder of ΧΙΧ, 12—16 shows his 
opinion after his eyes were opened. | 

4 Aesch. III. 63, 66—68: cf. 11. 54, 65, 109. See § 36, below. 

δ Dem. XIX. 69 gives Antipater and Parmenio: the 2nd Argument to XIX. 
(p. 3361) adds Eurylochus. It is hardly possible that the foreign envoys were 
present during the discussion of the terms of peace: this is shown by καλέσαι τοὺς 
πρέσβεις, XIX. 144. 


3268.) TWO MEETINGS OF ASSEMBLY. »-- 
as senator, showed the distinguished envoys all proper courtesies, in- 
_ yiting them to a grand private entertainment and proposing decrees to 
admit them to the Assembly and to make them guests of honour at the 
Dionysia. He personally escorted them to the theatre, where curtains 
had been provided to shield them from the early morning air and 
cushions to cover the stone seats. And when they departed for | 
_ home, he hired three yokes of mules for them and escorted them on 
horseback to Thebes’. 

31. One of the strangest charges made by Aeschines against 
Demosthenes is that of corrupt collusion with Philocrates in making 
the peace. Philocrates went into exile as a convicted criminal early in 
343 B.C., fleeing from Athens to escape the sentence of death which was 
soon passed upon him for treachery and bribery in making the peace 
Ea which is a reproach to his name*. Aeschines can henceforth think of no 
graver charge than this, with which he introduces his accusation of 
Demosthenes with regard to the peace: ‘‘ Now I return to the peace 
_ which you and Philocrates proposed®.” Can it be believed that this is 
“the same Aéschines who fifteen years before had described this same 
_ peace as “the peace made by me and Philocrates*”! His chief 
argument for the collusion is that Demosthenes caused the peace to be 
‘made in such unseemly haste that the Greek states which had been 
invited by Athens to an Hellenic council for mutual defence could not 
_ be represented in the negotiations. He constantly alludes to “the still 
absent embassies, which you sent to the Greeks.” 

. 32. These are the “roving envoys,” which were sent out on the 
motion of Eubulus, more than a year before, to unite the Greeks in a 
common cause against Philip. Aeschines himself says that, when 
Philip’s envoys came to Athens, the Athenian envoys were still absent, 
“summoning the Greeks against Philip®.” All these Greeks, it must 
᾿ς be remembered, were already at peace with him®. On what possible 


1 Dem. XIX. 235; Aesch. II. 55, 110, 111, 111, 76. See the reply of Dem. (Cor. 28) 
about the invitation to the theatre. 

2 See Essay IV. § 4. 

3 Aesch. 111. 57: καὶ δὴ ἐπανάγω ἐμαυτὸν ἐπὶ τὴν εἰρήνην ἣν σὺ καὶ Φιλοκράτης 
᾿ἐγράψατε. Cf. 1. 56. See the reply to this in Dem. Cor. 21. 

Ὁ 4 Aesch. I. 174: τὴν εἰρήνην τὴν dv ἐμοῦ καὶ Φιλοκράτους γεγενημένην. 

© See 8 21, note 4, with references. See Aesch. III. 65, ὁρῶντες ὑμᾶς αὐτοὺς μὲν 
παρακαλοῦντας ἐπὶ τὸν πόλεμον, and 68, ἀπεδήμουν παρακαλοῦντες τοὺς “λληνας ἐπὶ 
Φίλιππον. , 

© Dems. Cor. 248. 


252 HISTORICAL SKE Gas [ April, 


ground now could Aeschines, who had been one of the embassy which 
invited Philip’s envoys to Athens to negotiate a peace, demand after 
their arrival that all negotiations should be suspended until the return of 
envoys who had been absent more than a year stirring up hostility against 
Philip, and had shown no signs of returning or reporting? These ‘‘absent 
envoys” were pure inventions. Aeschines declares positively that not 
one of them had returned when the peace was made, and Demosthenes 
that there was no embassy then out’. This contradiction can be — 
reconciled only by the explanation given by Demosthenes, that all the 
Greeks had long ago been tried and found wanting,-—in fact, that Athens 
could find no states ready to join her in resisting Philip*. Aeschines 
expressed the same opinion in 343 B.c.* It is evident that Aeschines 
uses the word πρέσβεις in a very wide sense: his envoys were probably 
in great part not ambassadors with regular commissions, who were 
expected to report formally to the Senate and Assembly, but informal 
messengers, who were asked to sound public opinion in various states, 
to which many of them may have been going on business of their own, 
with the understanding that no reports were expected unless they had 
some message of importance to give. It is most probable that no 
reports had been made simply because there were no favourable re- 
sponses to report, and that no delay of the peace would have changed 
this result. At the same time, it is not surprising that the assembled 
allies, who knew little of the facts, were made to believe (as their vote 
shows) that delay might bring some new states to join in the peace‘. 

33. We have the most contradictory accounts from the two orators 


. | 
ei es Pun Dn fe Sel em en 


κυ 


1 Aesch. 11. 58, 59; Dem. Cor. 23%7. See note on the last passage, and the 
whole of Cor. 20 and~24. It is said in Dem. ΧΙΧ. τό, to which Aesch. II. 58, 59 
is a reply, that Aeschines spoke on the 19th of Elaphebolion in the presence of 
envoys (πρέσβεων) ods ἀπὸ τῶν Ἑλλήνων μετεπέμψασθε ὑπὸ τούτου πεισθέντες. This 
seems to show that some states had sent envoys in response to the invitations of the 
previous year, who were actually present when the peace was made. But it is hardly 
credible that any state could have been so far influenced by the Athenian embassies, 
which Demosthenes (Cor. 23) says were all failures, as actually to send envoys to the 
proposed Hellenic synod at Athens, which never had even a prospect of meeting. 
Schaefer (11. 215) suggests with great probability that these ‘‘ envoys” were θεωροί 
sent by certain states to the Dionysiac festival, who remained in Athens to watch the 
negotiations for peace. Such visitors might have brought informal messages from 
home in response to the Athenian proposals of the previous year. In this case 
Demosthenes uses πρέσβεις in as misleading a sense as Aeschines. 

2 Deni π lor:)a 3. 

SRREECHIAT γ0, 

4 Ibid. 11. 60. 


ἐξΐξ er Ay ee 


Pere Mg 


Feet ° 


+ 


)346B.c.] DISCUSSION OF TERMS OF PEACE. 253 


ΟΠ of the proceedings in the two meetings of the Assembly. In the first, 
on the eighteenth of Elaphebolion (April 15), the Macedonian envoys 
_ appeared before the people and stated plainly and firmly the terms on 
_ which Philip would make peace. These were, in general, ἑκατέρους ἃ 
ἔχουσιν ἔχειν, uti possidetis ; that is, no questions were to be raised as to 


still held, of course including Amphipolist. It was also stated that 
_ Philip would not recognize as allies of Athens either the Halians 
_ (whom he was besieging) or the Phocians*. In conformity with these 
announcements, probably after Philip’s ambassadors had withdrawn, 
᾿ς Philocrates, who was now acting in harmony with them, proposed a 
_ formal decree, establishing peace and alliance between Philip and his 

allies and Athens and her allies, excepting the Halians and Phocians’*. 
 Itis evident that the clause excluding the Halians and Phocians was 
= er by most of the Athenians with surprise and alarm. It signified 

_ plainly that Philip would do, in spite of the peace, the very thing which 
__ it was supposed the peace would prevent, that is, pass Thermopylae and 
__ overwhelm the Phocians with. the help of the Thebans, while Athens 
__ would have her hands tied by the peace. Demosthenes now had his 
g eyes thoroughly opened. Though he had favoured and even urged 

peace, as preferable to disastrous war, he was no advocate of “peace at 
_ any price,” and he now saw that the price was to be too hight He 
strongly opposed the motion of Philocrates, and advocated “the reso- 
᾿ lution of the allies,” which was, according to Aeschines, favoured by 
himself and ‘all the other speakers in the first assembly®. From 
| _ Aeschines, who appears to be not yet in the complete confidence of 
Ϊ : Philocrates and the Macedonian envoys, we have a final burst of exalted 
_ patriotism. As Demosthenes reports him, he declared that, though he 


thought a peace should be made, he would never advise Athens to 
_ make the peace proposed by Philocrates so long as a single Athenian 


| 1 [Dem.] Vil. 26: φησὶ δ᾽ (sc. Φίλιππος) ᾿Αμφίπολιν ἑαυτοῦ εἶναι. ὑμᾶς yap 
ψηφίσασθαι ἐκείνου εἶναι ὅτ᾽ ἐψηφίσασθε ἔχειν αὐτὸν ἃ εἶχεν. See Schol. on vil. 18 
(Ρ. 814): ὁ Φιλοκράτης ἐν τῷ ψηφίσματι γέγραφεν ἑκατέρους ἃ ἔχουσιν ἔχειν, χαριζόμενος 
Φιλίππῳ" πολλὰ γὰρ ἀλλότρια ἡρπάκει. 
2 Schaefer 11. 225. Cf. Just. VIII. 4. 
3 Dem. xx. 159 and 321 (quoted § 35, note 1), with 278. The motion of 
Philocrates in the Assembly presupposes some previous authority granted by the Senate : 
see Schaefer 11. 225, τι. 2. 
4 Dem. XIX. 96: βουλευομένων ὑμῶν οὐ περὶ τοῦ εἰ ποιητέον εἰρήνην ἢ μὴ (ἐδέδοκτο 


q γὰρ ἤδη τοῦτό ye), ἀλλ᾽ ὑπὲρ τοῦ ποίαν τινά. 
; δ᾽ Aesch. 111. 71. 


Philip’s right to any of the places which he had taken from Athens and - 


254 HISTORICAL “SKETCH. [ April, 


was left alive’. Finally, on the motion of Demosthenes, the Assembly 
rejected the proposition of Philocrates and adopted what was called the 
resolution of the allies, whose regular synod (συνέδριον) was then in 
session at Athens. The Macedonian envoys were then recalled and 
informed of this action’. | 

, 34. It is somewhat uncertain what is here meant by “the resolution 
of the allies” (τὸ τῶν συμμάχων δόγμα). We have two accounts of this 
from Aeschines*. In one he mentions only a clause recommending a 
postponement of the discussion about peace until the return of the 
‘‘absent envoys”; but the fact that the discussion was going on by 
general consent makes it impossible that this clause was advocated by 
‘Call the speakers in the former Assembly.” In the other he mentions a 
recommendation that only peace, and not alliance, should be discussed ; 
but this he deduces from the entire omission of the word “alliance” in 
the resolution, and it is obvious that neither Demosthenes nor all the 
other speakers could have opposed alliance’. He there mentions also 
the proposed provision that three months should be allowed, after the 
making of the peace, in which any Greek state might claim the ad- 
vantages of the peace and be recorded on the same column with Athens 
and her allies®*. This is the only part of the resolution which had any 


significance whatever on that day; and it must be this, azd this alone, 


which was adopted by the Assembly. This provision, if it were granted 
by Philip, would ensure the safety of the Phocians ; for they could then 
have claimed the protection of the peace as Greeks, without being 
recognized by Philip as allies of Athens. This important provision, 
supported, as it appears, by the authority of the synod of allies, was 
advocated by Demosthenes, as the only substitute for the fatal pro- 


position of Philocrates which was at all likely to be accepted by the 


Assembly®. Aeschines says that the general opinion, when the first 


1 Dem. ΧΙΧ. 13—16. ) 

2 Ibid. 144: κρατοῦντος ἐμοῦ τὴν προτέραν ἡμέραν, καὶ πεπεικότος ὑμᾶς τὸ τῶν 
συμμάχων δόγμα κυρῶσαι καὶ καλέσαι τοὺς πρέσβεις τοὺς τοῦ Φιλίππου. 

3 Aesch. 11. 60 and III. 69, 70. | 

4 Aesch. III. 68, 71. 

> Aesch. Ill. 70: ἐξεῖναι τῷ βουλομένῳ τῶν ‘EAAjvww ἐν τρισὶ μησὶν els τὴν αὐτὴν 
στήλην ἀναγεγράφθαι μετ᾽ ᾿Αθηναίων καὶ μετέχειν τῶν ὅρκων καὶ τῶν συνθηκῶν. A 
decree of 378—377 B.c. in C. I. Att. 11. no. 17 provides for a similar inscription upon 
a στήλη (Il. 69—72): els δὲ τὴν στήλην ταύτην ἀναγράφειν τῶν τε οὐσ[ῶ]ν πόλεων 
συμμαχίδων τὰ ὀνόματα καὶ [ἥτις ἂν ἄλλη σύμμαχος γί[γ]νηται. 


6 See Dem. ΧΙΧ. 144 (quoted above, note 2). The skill of Demosthenes in ~ 


persuading the Assembly to adopt this proposition, which completely nullified the 
proposition of Philocrates, even if this passed with the excluding clause, is hardly 


“<a 
fe 


y46B.c.] SECOND MEETING OF ASSEMBLY. 255 


Assembly adjourned, was that there would be peace, but that alliance 
would be made (if at all) later, in conjunction with all the Greeks. 

35. The following night brought about a great and sudden change 
in the whole situation. Philocrates had been too bold in pressing on 
the Assembly the plan of the Macedonian envoys. The sudden dis- 
closure of Philip’s designs against the Phocians and of his determination 
to use the peace for their destruction had caused so great excitement 
and roused so much opposition, that it was hopeless to attempt to pass 

_ the original excluding clause. At the same time it was seen to be fatal 
+. to all Philip’s plans to allow the proposition of the allies to be finally 
_ adopted. Philocrates was therefore compelled to amend _ his decree 

during the night, probably in consultation with Antipater and Parmenio. 

He brought it before the Assembly the next day without the excluding 

clause, reading simply “the Athenians and their allies” This change, 

_ which after the statements of the previous day meant nothing, appears 
_ to have allayed the excitement in great measure, and the decree in this 
_ form was finally passed without much opposition. This could not have 
been effected until the public. apprehensions about the Phocians had 

been quieted by diplomatic promises, like those which were so effectual 
_ after the return of the second embassy a few months later. Antipater 

and Parmenio simply maintained their ground, that Philip could not 
admit the Phocians as parties to the peace; but their friends in the 
_ Assembly (Philocrates and perhaps Aeschines) assured the people “on 
authority” that, though Philip could not offend the Thebans and 


appreciated by Grote, who condemns Demosthenes for not opposing Philocrates with 
4 greater energy. He was doubtless taken by surprise by the excluding clause, and it 
___was a triumph to cause its rejection and the adoption of an effective substitute. That 
Philip’s envoys were able to cajole the Assembly the next day by plausible promises 
into adopting the amended form of the decree of Philocrates, which then seemed 
innocent to the majority, is not surprising, nor a reproach to Demosthenes. 

1 Dem. XIX. 159: τήν τε γὰρ εἰρήνην οὐχὶ δυνηθέντων ws ἐπεχείρησαν οὗτοι, πλὴν 
Αλέων καὶ Φωκέων, γράψαι, ἀλλ᾽ ἀναγκασθέντος ὑφ᾽ ὑμῶν τοῦ Φιλοκράτους ταῦτα μὲν 
 ἀπαλεῖψαι, γράψαι δ᾽ ἄντικρυς ᾿Αθηναίους καὶ τοὺς ᾿Αθηναίων συμμάχους. See 
also 321: ἐντεῦθεν οἱ μὲν παρ᾽ ἐκείνου πρέσβεις προὔλεγον ὑμῖν ὅτι Φωκέας οὐ προσ- 
1 ᾿ δέχεται Φίλιππος συμμάχους" οὗτοι δ᾽ ἐκδεχόμενοι τοιαῦτ᾽ ἐδημηγόρουν, ws φανερῶς μὲν 
Ι οὐχὶ καλῶς ἔχει τῷ Φιλίππῳ προσδέξασθαι τοὺς Φωκέας συμμάχους διὰ τοὺς Θηβαίους 
ο΄ καὶ τοὺς Θετταλοὺς, ἂν δὲ γένηται τών πραγμάτων κύριος καὶ τῆς εἰρήνης τύχῃ, ἅπερ ἂν 
᾿ συνθέσθαι νῦν ἀξιώσαιμεν αὐτὸν, ταῦτα ποιήσει τότε. See further 220: μείζονα ἢ 
κατ᾽ ᾿Αμφίπολιν εὖ ποιήσειν ὑμᾶς ἐὰν τύχῃ τῆς εἰρήνης, Εὔβοιαν ᾿Ωρωπὸν ἀποδώσειν, κ.τ.λ. 
Demosthenes says (XIX. 15, 16) that he still opposed Philocrates, and advocated 
the resolution of the allies, adopted the day before, while Aeschines made the abomin- 
able speech which he quotes (see below, §§ 36, 37). It would be interesting to know 
_ how Aeschines spent the night before the second meeting. 


256 HISTORICAL SKETCH. [ April, 


Thessalians by publicly recognizing the Phocians, he would still, when 
the peace gave him greater freedom of action, do all that Athens could 
ask of him’. 

36. It is impossible to determine Bech. what was said or done 
by Aeschines and Demosthenes in the second meeting of the Assembly, 
in which the peace was actually voted. Nowhere are our two witnesses 
more hopelessly at odds. Demosthenes says that Aeschines, after his 
eloquent speech the day before, protesting vehemently against the 
motion of Philocrates, now told the people not to remember their 
ancestors nor to listen to stories of ancient sea-fights and trophies, but 
to enact that they would not help any one who had not previously 
helped Athens (meaning the Phocians)*. Instead of simply denying 
that he made such a speech and proving his denial by witnesses, 
Aeschines undertakes to show that he could not have spoken at all on 
the second day because by the decree of Demosthenes no speeches 
were to be made on that day!* But this argument (in 343 B.C.) is 
answered by his own account thirteen years later of a speech made by 
Demosthenes in that very meeting. He repeats what he calls a “dis- 
agreeable metaphor” then used by Demosthenes, that we must not 
wrench off (ἀπορρῆξαι) alliance from peace. Demosthenes (he says) then 
called on Antipater formally to answer a question, doubtless concerning 
Philip’s unwillingness to make peace without alliance, which Antipater 
answered, probably ἸΕΙΗΠΟΙΠΕ Philip’s refusal*. Aeschines calls this 
‘collusion with Philocrates.” | 

37. Though Aeschines denies so stoutly that no one could have | 
spoken in the second meeting, he further recounts a speech of his own, 


which must have been the one to which Demosthenes alludes, in which — ! 


he says he advised-the people to remember the glorious deeds of their 
ancestors, but to forget their mistakes, like the Sicilian expedition and 
the delay in ending the Peloponnesian war’. But he maintains that 
this speech was made in the first meeting, and that he made but one 
speech in the discussion, which Demosthenes has divided. When we 
consider that our testimony comes from the two opposing orators at the’ 
trial of Aeschines, and make all possible allowance for exaggeration and 


1 See quotations in the preceding note. 

2 Dem. XIx. 16. 

3 Aesch. 11. 63—66: see end of § 29 (above). 

4 Aesch. III. 71, 72. 

5 See Aesch. 11. 7477, where the substance of the spewehh is given. An historiea 
mistake is made in 76, where he says that the Sicilian expedition was sent after t 
fortification of Decelea by the Spartans! : 


Cae 


- 346B.c.] SECOND EMBASSY SENT TO PHILIP. 257 


“misrepresentation, we must admit that Aeschines reports his speech 
more fairly than Demosthenes. But when we weigh the testimony as to 
the date of the speech which Aeschines reports, we must decide that it 
was delivered on the second day, as Demosthenes declares. Eubulus 
finally threw the weight of his dignity and influence into the scale, and 


told the people plainly that they must either accept the terms proposed Ὁ 


by Philocrates and advocated by Aeschines or man their fleet, levy a 
_ war tax, and use their festival fund to pay soldiers’. We have no state- 
ment of the final position of Demosthenes except his assurance that at 
_ the second meeting he opposed Philocrates (whom the people at first 
refused to hear) and tried to amend his proposition for the peace®, still 

advocating the resolution of the allies adopted the day before. He put 

no trust in the flattering assurances of Athenians like Philocrates, who 

_ professed to speak for the absent Philip while his own ambassadors were 

- silent. But he was probably made more hopeful by the refusal of the 
people to exclude the Phocians by name, which left Athens free to act ; 
: and he perhaps trusted in the power of Athens to stop Philip again at 
Thermopylae if he should attempt to force the pass after the ratification 
᾿ς of the peace*. There is no reason to doubt that he did his best, fighting 
almost single-handed in a desperate strait. 


Cond 
. 


ls 


on the nineteenth of Elaphebolion (April 16), 346 B.c., ended the 
Amphipolitan War, which was begun in 357. A few weeks later, the 
___aged Isocrates sent to Philip his address called Φίλιππος, in which he 
_ expressed his joy at the peace and his hopes of much good to result 
_ from Philip’s leadership. 

A few days after the peace was voted, the same ten ambassadors, 
Erith Aglaocreon as representative of the allies*, were appointed to 
7 return to Macedonia-and receive the oaths of Philip and his allies to 
_ the peace and alliance. In an Assembly held on the twenty-fifth of 
᾿ς Elaphebolion, in which Demosthenes presided’, it was voted that the 


a 


4 = Dem. X1x. apy: ἢ 

“2 Tbid. 15: ἐμοῦ τῷ τῶν συμμάχων συνηγοροῦντος δόγματι καὶ τὴν εἰρήνην ὅπως 

ἴση καὶ δικαία γένηται eather 7a Cf. 292: αἰσχρὰν ἀντ᾽ ἴσης συνέβη γενέσθαι τὴν 
εἰρήνην. 

᾿ς 8 The rather mixed feelings of Demosthenes at this time appear in. XIX. 150: 

μέχρι 1 τούτου γε (the departure of Philip’s envoys) οὐδὲν ἀνήκεστον ἣν τῶν πεπραγμένων, 

ἀλλ᾽ αἰσχρὰ μὲν ἡ εἰρήνη καὶ ἀναξία τῆς πόλεως, ἀντὶ δὲ τούτων δὴ τὰ θαυμάσια ἀγαθὰ 

Aled ἔμελλεν ἔσεσθαι. 

4 Dem. ΧΙΧ. 163—165; Aesch. 11. 97, 126. See Schaefer 11. 240. 

δ Demosthenes was still senator ; and he was the one of the nine πρόεδροι (chosen 

‘each morning by the ἐπιστάτης of the Prytanes from the senators of the nine other 


GD. 17 


38. The peace of Philocrates, thus voted by the Athenian Assembly. 


258 HISTORICAL SKETCH. [Apr.—June, — 


representatives of the allies of Athens then present in the synod should 
take the oath on that day before the Macedonian envoys in the name of 
their respective states’. [he Phocians were probably not represented 
in the synod: otherwise the whole question of their admission to the 
oaths would have been raised and finally decided at this time. Whether 
Cersobleptes, the Thracian king, whose friendship Athens valued, was 
represented in the oath-taking or not, cannot be determined. In either 
case, he was excluded from the treaty by Philip, and his country in 
Thrace had been occupied by Philip’s troops on the day before the 
oaths were taken at Athens”. | 

39. As Aeschines gives us our chief account of the first embassy, 5899. 
Demosthenes tells the story of the second®. When the oaths had been 
taken, Demosthenes urged his colleagues on the embassy to set out with 
all spegd to administer the oaths to Philip, knowing well that every day 
might be of the greatest importance to Athens. Philip was all this time 
vigorously pressing his conquests in Thrace, after Athens had tied her 
hands by making the peace. As his entreaties availed nothing, he 
procured (3rd of Munychion, April 29) a decree of the Senate (which the _ 
people had empowered to act until the next Assembly), directing the εἰ 
embassy to depart at once, and ordering Proxenus, who still kept his 
fleet north of Euboea, to convey them to Philip, wherever he might be*. 
In defiance of this vote, the embassy first waited a long time at Oreus 
in Euboea‘; and then, instead of sailing with Proxenus, travelled by a 


tribes) to whom it came by lot to preside in the Senate or the Assembly, as ἐπιστάτης Ὶ 
τῶν προέδρων. See Aesch. 11. 82, III: 73, 74- ' 

1 Aesch. 11. 82—85. 

2 See Dem. ΧΙΧ. 174; Aesch. 11. go. Aeschines tells us (in III. 73; 74_and 
11. 83, 84) two directly opposite stories of the exclusion of Cersobleptes from the Ν᾿ 
oaths; one, that he had no delegate in the synod and therefore was excluded ; the | 
other that a person claiming to be his representative was admitted on a motion put to. 
vote by the other πρόεδροι after Demosthenes had refused (as ἐπιστάτη5) to take the vote. 
The spelling Κερσεβλέπτης occurs in a newly found Delphic inscription of about 350 B.C. 
See Bull. de Corresp. Hellén. 1896, pp. 466—496. See also C. I. Att. Iv. 2, no. i? ; 

3 We have in Dem. XIX. a clear and full account of the second embassy a 
its disastrous results, generally in the following order: 1530—173, 17—66; and i in 
Cor. 25—27, 30—36, a brief but graphic résumé of the same events, comewhil 
modified by the changes of the past thirteen years. Though Aeschines denies some 
of the details, he says nothing which breaks the force of the clear and straightforwar d 
statements of Demosthenes. aa 

4 Dem. XIX. 154. 

5 Demosthenes is said by Aeschines (11. 89) to have charged him with waiting in 
Oreus to secure appointments as πρόξενοι for himself and some of his colleagues, 
mpotevias κατασκευαζόμενοι (γινόμενοι πρόξενοι, Schol.). This is confirmed by Dem, 


346B.c.| SECOND EMBASSY IN MACEDONIA. - 259 
circuitous land route to Pella, where they arrived twenty-three days 
after leaving Athens. ‘There they waited twenty-seven days for Philip’s 
return from his conquests in Thrace. In the time thus gained he had 
captured several Thracian towns, (among others) Doriscus, Serrhium, 
and Ἱερὸν ὄρος, in which Cersobleptes was taken prisoner. Demos- 
thenes constantly protested pegaast this delay in the most vigorous - 
terms”. 
40. The Athenians found at Pella envoys from Thebes, Thessaly, 
Sparta, and other Greek states, awaiting Philip’s return’. ‘There were 
_ also envoys from Phocis, anxiously waiting to learn their fate*. Philip 
received the Athenians in the presence of the other envoys, and sur- 
rounded by his army, which was ready for his march to Thermopylae’. 
Demosthenes says nothing of the speeches at this interview; but 
_ Aeschines says that Demosthenes abused his colleagues and flattered 
_ Philip, recounting his services in supporting Philocrates and hastening 
_ the peace. Aeschines then made his own speech, in which he exhorted 
Philip to enter Greece as the friend of the Phocians and the enemy of 
_ the Thebans, intimating to him quite plainly that, though the Phocians 
by the fortunés of war succeeded in seizing the temple of Delphi, the 
_ Thebans intended to seize it and were therefore no less guilty than the 
- Phocians®. ‘The result of this speech, when it was repeated in much 
plainer language at Athens after the return of the embassy (see δ 44, 
45), in preventing the Athenians from doing anything to protect the 
_ Phocians, shows that Philip had as yet given no public indication of his 
teal intentions to either side. 
} While the envoys were at Pella, Philip sent them large presents of 
_ gold, of which Demosthenes refused to accept his share’, He devoted 


Cor. 82° (see note), where Aeschines is said to have entertained the envoys of the 
tyrants of Oreus and Eretria in 343—342 as their πρόξενος. See Schaefer 11. 249, ἢ. 2. 
1 Dem. xix. 154, 155; Cor. 25—27. In Cor. 30 Demosthenes says that the 
embassy ‘sat three whole months in Macedonia” before Philip returned. Of 
f ourse there ng, no attempt to deceive in this rhetorical exaggeration, as it is from 
ἐς emosthenes himself (XIX. 155) that we know the exact time (50 days), including the 
journey from Athens. In XIX. 158, just after giving this exact time, he says the 
embassy was absent ‘*three whole months.”’ 

; _ 2 Dem. vu. 64, IX. 15, Cor. 27, XIX. 156: cf. Aesch. III. 82. 

a 3 Aesch. I. 108, 112, 136; Dem. XIX. 139. 

4 Justin vi. 4; Dem. Ix. 11. 

5 Aesch. 11. 103, 132. 

_ © For the two speeches see Aesch. 11. ating 12, 113—117; and Dem. ΧΙΣ. 20, 
i , , for the report made by Aeschines in Athens of his address to Philip. 

7 Dem. ΧΙΧ. 166—168. 

17—2 


260 FAISTORICAL ΔΑ ΣΝ [June, July, 


much of his time to procuring the release of the Athenian captives who 
were still in Philip’s hands. He lent several of these the money needed 
for their ransom, which he later refused to receive back when Philip 
released the other prisoners without ransom’. 

41. When the time came for Philip to swear to the peace, the 
majority of the embassy supported Philocrates and Aeschines in allowing 
him formally to exclude the Phocians, the Halians, and Cersobleptes 
from the recognized allies of Athens. In the same way the Cardians 
were later accepted as allies of Philip®. In fact, Demosthenes was 
generally outvoted in the deliberations of the embassy®*. The embassy i 
refused by vote to send to Athens a letter written by Demosthenes, and ᾿ 
sent one of their own with a different account of their doings*. Demos- ἢ 
thenes hired a vessel to take him home alone; but Philip forbade him ~ 
to depart®. In this state of things we can easily believe what Aeschines _ 
says, that no one would willingly mess with Demosthenes or lodge at ἵ 
the same inn with him’®. : 

42. After Philip had sworn to the peace, the embassy had no Τ 
further pretext for wasting time at Pella. They had been instructed also 
to administer the oaths to Philip’s allies in their respective cities; but 
nothing like this had yet been done’. Here Demosthenes makes a 
downright charge of corruption against Philip, that of bribing the — 
embassy to wait until his army was ready to march to Thermopylae®. — 
All was now ready. Then followed a most disgraceful and humiliating — 
spectacle. Philip marched forth from his capital with his army for the ᾿ 
invasion of Greece, the result of which—whether he favoured the Thebans i 
or the Phocians—must be the humiliation of a proud people; andinhis | 
train followed meekly (with one exception) an Athenian embassy which 
had basely betrayed the interests of Athens. There followed also a 
band of Phocian suppliants, who must now have known that the down- 
fall of their race was impending. When they arrived at Pherae, oe 

1 Dem. XIx. 169, 170. 1 


2 Ibid. 44: ἐκ τοῦ, ὅτε τοὺς ὅρκους ἤμελλε Φίλιππος ὀμνύναι τοὺς περὶ τῆς elptyns, Ὁ ͵ 


ἐκσπόνδους ἀποφανθῆναι τοὺς Φωκέας ὑπὸ τούτων. Cf. 278: οὐ τὸ μὲν ψήφισμα 
᾿Αθηναίοις καὶ τοῖς ᾿Αθηναίων συμμάχοις, οὗτοι δὲ Φωκέας ἐκσπόνδους ἀπέφηναν Σ΄ 
and 174. For the Cardians see v. 25, VIII. 66; and ὃ 61 (below). For the ψήφισμα. 
see § 35 (above), and Dem. XIX. 159. 4 
3 Dem. XIX. 173. 4 Ibid. 174. 3 
® Ibid. 15.522; 6 Aesch. Il. 97. 
7 Dem. XIX. 278: οὐ τὸ μὲν ψήφισμα τοὺς ἄρχοντας ὁρκοῦν τοὺς ἐν Tals πόλεσιν, ; 
οὗτοι δὲ obs Φίλιππος αὐτοῖς τρϑσεκειορε, τούτους ὡρκισαν ; = | 
8 Dem. Cor. 32: ὠνεῖται rap’ αὐτῶν ὅπως μὴ ἄπιμεν. 


> 
s 


- 


_ long-neglected duty of administering the oath to Philip’s allies—or 
rather to those whom Philip saw fit to summon as their representatives— 
was performed in a tavern, ‘in a manner which was disgraceful and 
unworthy of Athens,” as Demosthenes adds’. 

-« 43. After this ceremony the embassy returned to Athens without 


more delay, arriving on the thirteenth of Scirophorion (July 7), after — 


an absence of about ten weeks. When they arrived, Philip was already 
at Thermopylae, negotiating with the Phocians for a peaceable surrender 
_ of the pass*. ‘This was just what Philip had planned: the Athenians 
had now little time to consider whether they should send a fleet to 
_ defend Thermopylae, and he trusted to the quieting reports of his friends 
on the embassy to prevent any hostile action. The scheme worked 
perfectly. A temporary obstruction was caused by the report of Demos- 
_ thenes to the Senate. There he told the plain truth, that Philip was at 
| the gates of Hellas, ready to attack the Phocians; and he urged that 
᾿ς δῇ expedition should even then be sent to Thermopylae with the. fifty 
triremes which were kept ready for such an emergency. The Senate 
_ believed Demosthenes, and passed a vote expressing their approval 
of his conduct. ‘They insulted the embassy in an unprecedented manner, 
by omitting the customary vote of thanks and the invitation to dine in 
the Prytaneum®. 
: 44. But Philocrates and Aeschines had planned their scheme too 
artfully to be thus thwarted ; and inthe Assembly of the sixteenth of Sci- 
᾿ς rophorion, probably held the day after the meeting of the Senate, all was 
| _ changed. Here Demosthenes found a body of his enemies, who would 
_ not permit him to be heard or the vote of the Senate to be read*. 
 Aeschines at once took the platform, and easily carried the meeting 
with him by disclosing the private information about Philip’s real plans 
_ which (he said) Philip had confided to him at Pella. He admitted that 
Philip was at Thermopylae with his army; but he assured the people 
: that, if they would stay at home quietly two or three days, they would 
4 a that Philip was besieging ‘Thebes, restoring the smaller Boeotian 
_ towns to independence, and compelling the Thebans (not the Phocians) 
_ to pay for the treasure stolen from Delphi.- He repeated the advice 


1 Dem. ΧΙΧ. 158. 

2 Tbid. 58. From the 3rd of Munychion, when the Senate directed the embassy 
_ to depart (see § 39), to the 13th of Scirophorion is 6g days. We do not know how 
soon the order of the Senate was obeyed. 

| 3 Ibid. 18, 31, 32; and 322, τὴν δὲ βοήθειαν ἔδει κωλῦσαι τὴν εἰς Tas Πύλας, ἐφ᾽ ἣν 
᾿ αἱ πεντήκοντα τριήρεις ὅμως ἐφώρμουν. See Cor. 327-. 

Semin XIX. 23, 35. 


346 B.c.]} RETURN OF THE SECOND EMBASSY. 70s 


"oT 
- 


262 HISTORICAL SKETCH. (July, 


which (he said) he had given to Philip, for which a price had been set 
on his head at Thebes. He also implied that Euboea was to be given 
to Athens as a recompense for Amphipolis, and hinted obscurely at a 
restitution of Oropus to Athens’. Then Philip’s letter was read, full 
of general friendliness, but containing absolutely nothing about the 
Phocians and no promises of any kind. Demosthenes charges Aeschines 
with being the writer of this letter. After the astounding disclosures 
made by Aeschines, it is not strange that Demosthenes could gain no 
hearing, and that the people felt hopeful and happy, proud of the 
diplomatic triumph of Aeschines and convinced that Demosthenes was 
a hopeless grumbler’. 

45. In this temper the Assembly was ready to vote almost any- 
thing which would make it easy for Philip to carry out his beneficent ~ 
plan. <A decree was passed, on the motion of Philocrates, publicly 
thanking Philip for his friendly promises, extending the peace and 
alliance to posterity, and (what was more important) enacting that, if 
the Phocians still refused to surrender the temple ‘‘to the Amphictyons,” 
the Athenians would compel them to do so by force*. They then 
appointed ten ambassadors, chiefly members of the previous embassies, 
to report these proceedings to Philip at Thermopylae. Demosthenes at 
once refused to go on this embassy. Aeschines made no objection at 
the time; but afterwards, when it was thought that his presence in 
Athens would be important at the coming crisis, he excused himself on 
the ground of illness, and his brother, probably Aphobetus, went in his 
place’. 

Soon afterwards came two letters from Philip, inviting the Athenians 
to send a force to join him at Thermopylae®. As Demosthenes shows, 

1 Dem. XIX. 19—22, 35,74, 220, 3243273 Cor. 35; V. Ὁ, 10; VI. 303 cf. Aesch. 
1. 136. The obscure language of Aeschines (11. 121) οὐκ ἐν τῷ ψηφίσματι μόνον ἡμᾶς | 
ἐπήνει is rightly explained by Schaefer (11. 269 n.) as meaning that 22 was not by a — 
mere decree (as after the first embassy) that Demosthenes expressed his approval of us. 
This “approval” consisted in a sarcastic remark, οὐκ ἔφη pe, ὥσπερ ἐκεῖ εἶπον, οὕτως 


ἐν τῷ παρόντι λέγειν, ἀλλ᾽ ἐκεῖ διπλασίως ἄμεινον (122), i.e. Demosthenes implied that | 
Aeschines’s address to Philip far outdid (in enormity) his account of it to the | 


Assembly. a 
2 Dem. XIX. 36—4I. q 

3 Ibid. 23, 24. 4 

4. Ibid. 48—s0: here it is said of the so-called Amphictyons, ahaa ov yap ἧσαν ᾿ 
αὐτόθι πλὴν Θηβαῖοι καὶ Θετταλοί. : 
5 Ibid. 121—124 (see ὃ 47, below). 7 


§ Ibid. 51, 52: ἐπιστολὰς δύο καλούσας ὑμᾶς, οὐχ iv’ ἐξέλθοιτε. See Aesch. Il. 137: 
ὑμῖν δὲ οὐκ ἔπεμψεν ἐπιστολὴν ὁ Φίλιππος ἐξιέναι πάσῃ TH δυνάμει bene τοῖς 
δικαίοις; to help the cause of justice! 


346 B.C] THIRD EMBASSY. — 263 


these were really sent to prevent them from marching out, as Philip 
thought this cordial invitation would quiet their alarm, and so be the 
surest means of keeping them at home. We hear of no appeals from 
_ Aeschines or his friends urging the acceptance of the invitation. Indeed, 
_ public opinion at Athens was changing, so that perhaps there was danger 
of the invitation being accepted in a different spirit. Aeschines even 
says that some of the party of Demosthenes prevented its acceptance, 
professing to fear that the Athenian force might be held as hostages by 
Philip”. | 
46. ‘There were Phocian envoys at Athens on the return of the 
embassy from Pella, and they remained until after the assembly of the 
sixteenth of Scirophorion. The action then taken showed them that 
_ they had nothing to hope from Athens, and they returned home with 
this unwelcome news. With the help of Athens by land and sea, 
Phalaecus and his army of 10,000 infantry and 1000 cavalry might 
still have held Thermopylae against Philip. But without help this was 
‘impossible*. The Lacedaemonians had already deserted them*, and 
“now nothing was left but to surrender on the best terms which could 
‘be made. Demosthenes declares that the action of the Assembly on 
the 16th was the direct cause of the surrender of the Phocians on 
the oh 


‘the 21st of Scirophorion (July 15). When they came to Chalcis, they 
heard that the Phocians had surrendered, while Philip had openly 
declared himself for the Thebans, and all the hopes in which Athens 
had indulged were at an end. As the envoys had no instructions to 
meet this emergency, they returned to Athens at once. One of them, 
Dercylus, who was in advance of the rest, came directly into a meeting 
of the Assembly in the Piraeus (on the 27th) and reported his alarming 
news from Thermopylae*®. The people were struck with panic at the 


1 Dem. XIX. 122 (end). 
2 Aesch. 11. 137. 
Ὁ Dem. XIX. 58, 123: 

4 Ibid. 73: "6, 77: 
ὃ See the calculation in Dem. XIX. 58, 59. Allowing four days for the news of 
the 16th to reach the Phocians and three days more for making terms, he puts the 
surrender on the 23rd (July 17). Four days later (on the τετρὰς φθίνοντος, the 27th) 
the news came to the Assembly in the Piraeus. Usener (Rhein. Mus. xxXIv. 440), 
who omits the ἐνάτη φθίνοντος (though it is expressly mentioned in the text of 
Demosthenes), places the surrender a day earlier. See Schaefer 11. 282, note 1. If 
we assume that Scirophorion this year had 30 days, there is no day to be omitted. 
_ ὁ Dem. ΧΙΧ. 60, ray: cf. Aesch. 11. 94, 95. 


47. The third Athenian embassy set out for Thermopylae about: 


264 HISTORICAL SKETCH. [346 


tidings, and voted, on the motion of Callisthenes, to remove the women 
and children from the country into protected towns or fortresses, to put 
the Piraeus and the forts in a state of defence, and to hold the coming 
festival of the Heraclea, usually held in the country, within the city 
walls’. Such a panichad not been known in Athens since the last days 
of the Peloponnesian War. ‘They also voted to send to Philip the same 
embassy which had returned from Chalcis, with instructions to watch 
the proceedings of the Amphictyonic Council, which Philip was ex- 
pected to summon at once*. The Athenians were not only in great 
alarm, but in absolute uncertainty about Philip’s next step. He might 
even join the Thebans in a march upon Athens; and the road was 
open. Even Aeschines admits the bitter disappointment at Athens and 
the bitter feeling against the ambassadors’. 

Soon after the surrender of the Phocians, Philip addressed a diplo- 
matic letter to the Athenians, evidently in an apologetic tone, deprecating 
their indignation at his unexpected course, and trying to conciliate them 
by assurances of his continued friendship. As Demosthenes says, it was 
written really to inform the Thebans and Thessalians that he was acting 
directly against the wishes and the hopes of Athens‘. 

48. ΤΠ embassy soon departed on its new mission by way of 
Thebes. Aeschines had now no fear of the Thebans or of the price 


they had set upon his head®. They arrived at Philip’s camp just in time __ 


to be present at the festivities with which he and the Thebans were 
celebrating the joyous conclusion of the war and their triumph over the 
sacrilegious Phocians ; and they appear to have had no scruples against 


* Dem. ΧΙΧ. 86, Cor. 36; Aesch. 111. 80. Aesch. 11. 139 says ἐσκευαγώγησαν ἐκ 
τῶν ἀγρῶν, πρεσβεύοντος ἐμοῦ τὴν τρίτην ἤδη πρεσβείαν, from which Schaefer (11. 293; 
n. 3) infers that the decree was not passed until after the next departure of the 
embassy (δ 48). But Dem. ΧΙΧ. 125 implies clearly that the decree was passed either 
at the meeting in the Piraeus or immediately afterwards; and the words of Aesch. 
state only that the execution (not the passage) of the decree followed his departure. 

» Aesch, II. 95: προσαναγκάζοντος τοῦ δήμου μηδὲν ἧττον πρεσβεύειν ἡμᾶς. This 
seems to imply a reappointment of the embassy, and this agrees with Dem. ΧΙΧ. 172, 
ἐπὶ τὴν τρίτην πρεσβείαν δίς με χειροτονησάντων ὑμῶν δὶς ἐξωμοσάμην. In XIX. 126 
Demosthenes charges Aeschines with going on this embassy without any δυο να 
at all. 


® Dem. XIX. 328: γέγονε τὰ πράγματα πάνθ᾽ ὥσπερ αἴνιγμα τῇ mode. Aesch. 
II. 80: 

4 See Dem. Cor. 39, 40, with notes. 

δ Dem. XIX. 21, 127. We have only the repeated authority of Demosthenes 
(see § 44, above) for the reported statement of Aeschines on this point. 


Bc] PUNISHMENT OF THE PHOCIANS. _ ὅς 


_ joining in the celebration’. Philip had himself accepted the surrender 
of the Phocians on condition that Phalaecus with his 8000 mercenaries 
should be allowed to depart whithersoever they pleased ; and they with- 
drew to Peloponnesus®. But the Phocian people were handed over to a 
far less merciful power. Philip had entered Phocis as the champion of 
Apollo, whose violated temple he was to restore to its rightful guardians, 


meeting of this venerable body, or rather what he chose to call by this 

distinguished name*. The Council voted to expel the Phocians, and to 

give their two votes to Philip, thus putting a foreign king in the place of 
one of the original Amphictyonic tribes. ‘The Phocian towns, except 
Ϊ Abae with its ancient temple of Apollo, twenty in number, were to be 
destroyed, and the people to be divided into villages of not more than 
fifty houses ; their horses were to be sold for the benefit of the temple, 
and their arms thrown down precipices; and they were to pay sixty 
talents yearly to the temple until the stolen treasure should be made 
good*. We have records of payments made by the Phocians on this 
account from 344 to 337 B.c.°. Any Phocian who was personally guilty 
of plundering the temple was declared accursed and outlawed®. This 


1 Dem. XIX. 128, 130, Cor. 287. See the lame defence of Aeschines, who does not 
deny that he took part in these festivities, 11. 162, 163: ἐκλήθην ἐπὶ ξένια μετὰ τῶν 
συμπρέσβεων, κιτ.λ. He seems to think that the number of guests, about 200, and 
_ [δε fact that he only joined in the chorus as a common singer, excused him. See 
Essay IV. § 6. 

ἜΣ. 2 See § 52, below. 

8 Demosthenes (V. 14) calls this assembly τοὺς συνεληλυθότας τούτους Kal φάσκοντας 
᾿Αμφικτύονας viv εἶναι. See XIX. 50: οὐδενὸς δ᾽ ἄλλου παρόντος τῶν ᾿Αμφικτυόνων πλὴν 
Θετταλῶν καὶ Θηβαίων. Cf. ΧΙΧ. 327. Athens had no part in the Ionian representa- 
tion, nor Sparta in the Dorian; the Phocians were gone; Boeotia was only Thebes ; 
the Locrians were present ; six of the other Amphictyonic tribes (Aesch. 11. 116) were 
Thessalian. 

Selena Oo Βαϊ: X. 3,3; Dem. ΧΙΧ. 81, 141, Cor. 36, 42, IX. 19, 26. Cf. 
Aesch. 11. 9, 111. 80. 

® The French explorers at Delphi have found an interesting inscription recording 
several payments madeyby the Phocians, published by Emile Bourguet in the Bull. de 
_ Corresp. Hellén. 1897, pp. 321—344. By comparison of this with another inscription 
_ containing temple records (ibid. pp. 477—496), Bourguet shows with great probability 
that the Phocians made eight semi-annual payments of thirty talents each in 344— 
_ 340 B.C., two annual payments of thirty talents in 339 and 338, one of ten talents in 
337, and an “eighteenth” of ten talents in a later year, which assumes six intermediate 
_ payments. The reduction to ten talents followed the battle of Chaeronea. These 
talents were probably of the Aeginetan standard, about 4°; heavier than the Attic 
(see above, § 8, note 2). See American Journal of Archaeology, 1899, p. 306. 

§ Diod. xvi. 60. 


i 


the Amphictyonic Council. He therefore lost no time in calling a 


ET 


266 HIISTORICAL SKETCH. [346 


terrible sentence was executed with more than strict exactness, with the 
Thebans for executioners’. When Demosthenes went to Delphi more 
than two years later, he witnessed the pitiable condition of Phocis and 
its wretched people, with walls and houses destroyed, and nobody to 
be seen except old women and little children and miserable old men?. 
A harder fate still befell Orchomenus, Coronea, and probably Corsiae in 
Boeotia, for their adherence to the Phocians. ‘Their walls were razed 
and the inhabitants sold into slavery. Boeotia, with a substantial piece 
of Phocis*, was then brought under the dominion of Thebes. Sparta, 
for assisting the Phocians, was excluded from the Delphic temple. The 


προμαντεία, precedence in consulting the oracle, which the Phocians had » 


granted to Athens in the time of Pericles for her help in the short 
Sacred War of 448 B.c., was taken from her and given to Philip*, Still, 
it was the decided policy of Philip to have no open breach with Athens 
at this time’. 


* Dem. XIX. 325: τὰ Φωκέων τείχη κατεσκάπτετο' Θηβαῖοι δ᾽ ἦσαν οἱ κατασκάπτοντες. 

* Ibid. 64—66. Demosthenes saw good reason for exclaiming τούτων δεινότερα 
οὐ γέγονεν οὐδὲ μείζω πράγματ᾽ ἐφ᾽ ἡμῶν ἐν τοῖς “λλησιν, οἶμαι δ᾽ οὐδ᾽ ἐν τῷ πρόσθεν 
χρόνῳ. For ἃ graphic account of the state of Phocis at this time, see Justin, vimI. 5. 

® Dem. XIX. 112, 127, 3253 VIII. 65, οὐκ ἣν ἐν Θήβαις ἀσφαλὲς (λέγειν τὰ Φιλίππου), 
πρὶν τὴν Βοιωτίαν ἀπέδωκε καὶ τοὺς Φωκέας ἀνεῖλεν. XIX. 141, ᾿᾽Ορχομενὸς, Κορώνεια, 
Κορσιαὶ, τὸ Τιλφωσσαῖον, τῆς τῶν Φωκέων χώρας ὁπόσην βούλονται. 

* Plut. Per. 21; Dem. 1x. 32 (one of the doubtful passages), XIX. 327 (end). 
For Sparta see Paus. x. 8, 2 ; 

δ Among the most interesting inscriptions recently found at Delphi are two of the 
fourth century B.C. containing business accounts of the Amphictyonic Council and 
especially of the board of ναοποιοί, Temple-builders, who probably had charge of build- 
ing the still unfinished temple (see § 72, p. 287, note 3). See Bull. de Corresp. Hellén. 
1896, pp. 197—241, 1898, pp. 303—328. During the time from 353 to 346 B.C. only 
two of the semi-annual meetings of this board are mentioned, one with four members 
present, and one in the spring of 348 with ten (a Delphian, an Athenian, two Locrians, 
a Megarian, an Epidaurian, a Lacedaemonian, two Corinthians, and a Phocian). 
Four times the omission of the meeting is noted, οὐ συνῆλθον. This was during the 
hardest stress of the Phocian War. But in the archonship of Damoxenus, which 
Bourguet identifies with great certainty as 346—345 B.C., we find this entry: ᾿Επὶ 


Aapogévov ἄρχοντος, ὀπωρινᾶς πυλαίας, ἐπεὶ a εἰρήνα ἐγένετο, ναοποιοὶ συνῆλθον. 


Now there were present 36 members, including nine Thessalians and three Thebans 
(long strangers to Delphi), two Athenians, three Spartans, and one Delphian. No 
Phocians are present; but in their place is the ominous entry, Φίλιππος Μακεδών, 
Τιμανορίδας Μακεδών (Philip’s name standing thus, the tenth in the list). This was at 
the meeting of the Council called by Philip in the autumn of 346, after the surrender 


of the Phocians (see above, § 48). The ναοποιοί, being a permanent board, had not yet 


been reconstituted, except that Philip and another Macedonian had quietly steppes 
into the places of the absent Phocians. 


| 
᾿ 
Ἷ 
4 
ἷ 
; 


i 


49. The Pythian games were celebrated at Delphi at their regular 
time, in September 346 8.6.1} Philip was empowered by the Am- 
phictyonic Council to hold the festival with the Boeotians (1.6. the 
Thebans) and the Thessalians*. The games were celebrated by Philip 
with unusual splendour, but with no delegates present from either 
Athens or Sparta. For 240 years Athens had sent her deputation to 


Apollo had once trodden on his progress from Delos to Delphi; and her 
absence now was an historic event®. Thus was Philip formally installed 
in his long-coveted position as a power in Greece, representing in his 
own person one of the original Greek peoples which had in immemorial 
antiquity established the Amphictyonic union. 

f Thus ended the disastrous Sacred War, after a duration of more than 
_ ten years, with the exaltation of Philip and the humiliation of Athens, 
_ though neither was a party to the war or was even interested in it when 

it began. 

50. Before returning home after the Pythian games, Philip deter- 
mined to secure from Athens-at least a formal recognition of his new 
position as an Amphictyonic power. He therefore sent thither a 
deputation of his own with Thessalian envoys (probably Amphictyons), 
to ask for a confirmation of his election to the Council4 The con- 
spicuous absence of Athens from both Council and games embarrassed 
and annoyed Philip greatly. Athens also was in a delicate position. 
Philip still had his powerful army with him, and he could summon 

Thebans, Locrians, and Thessalians to support him in an Amphictyonic 
war, if Athens should refuse his request. It would have been simple 
madness for Athens, in her isolation and humiliation, to defy him by a 
downright refusal. But the people were in no mood to assent to what 
they deemed a disgrace to Greece and an insult to themselves. When 


i 
& ,.-. 
ὃ 
Ε 
“ἡ 
᾿ 1 
᾽ 


rap Peete δῶ & 


See 


_ 


᾿ 1 The Pythian games were celebrated in the third year of each Olympiad, near the 
end of the Delphic month Βουκάτιος, which corresponds generally to the second Attic 
month, Metageitnion. The year 346—345 B.c. began July 25. See Essay III. § 3, 
Ῥ. 329, ἢ. 2. Pausanias Χ. 7, 8 refers to this Pythian festival as πρώτῃ Πυθιάδι ἐπὶ 
ταῖς ἑξήκοντα, καὶ ᾿Ιολαΐδας ἐνίκα Θηβαῖος, i.e. the 61st, counting from 586 B.c. 

2 Diod. xvi. 60. 

8. Dem. XIX. 128, ὥστε μήτε τοὺς ἐκ THs βουλῆς θεωροὺς μήτε τοὺς θεσμοθέτας εἰς τὰ 
Πύθια πέμψαι. See Aeschyl. Eumen. g—16. 

4 Dem. XIx. 111—113: this describes the exciting scene in the Assembly, ending 
with the sarcastic remark of Aeschines before Philip’s envoys (113), πολλοὺς τοὺς 
θορυβοῦντας εἷναι, ὀλίγους δὲ τοὺς στρατευομένους ὅταν δέῃ. Demosthenes makes no 
allusion to his own speech. 


Ren NO A RR PAI μὰ, bad tee ARES 


Be] PYTHIAN GAMES—SPEECH ON THE PEACE. 267 


these games with great pomp and ceremony over the Sacred Way, which © 


OO “σου υνϑον τ πον ΚΣ 


4: 


268 HISTORICAL SKETCH. [346- 
4& 


Aeschines came forward alone to urge compliance, he was hooted and 
could get no hearing. Demosthenes was perhaps the only man in 
Athens who could persuade the Assembly to take the humiliating course 
which prudence now made necessary. This he did in his speech 
On the Peace (v.), in which, while he makes no attempt to conceal 
the false position in which Athens had ignorantly allowed herself to be 
placed, he yet advises her not to court further calamity by a vain 
resistance to an accomplished fact’. We do not know what reply he 
proposed to the Amphictyonic message; but we may be sure that it 
conceded nothing in principle, while it formally declined to oppose the 
will of the Amphictyons in electing Philip to their Council. 


IV. Six YEARS OF NOMINAL PEACE. 
346—340 B.C. 


51. The peace of Philocrates lasted, at least in name, until the 
formal renewal of the war with Philip in 340 B.c. But all this time 
Philip was busy in extending his power, especially to the detriment of 
Athens. In 344 we find him subjugating Illyrians and Triballi’, and 
soon afterwards breaking up free governments in Thessaly, putting 
garrisons into the citadels, seizing the revenues of the ports, and estab- 
lishing a decadarchy*. He interfered in the disputes of Sparta with 
Argos, Messene,.and Megalopolis, sending help to the latter. Athens, 
on the motion of Demosthenes, voted to send envoys to Peloponnesus 
to counteract this dangerous influence, and of these Demosthenes was 
chief. In the Second Philippic he repeats parts of his speech to the 
Messenians, in which he warned them of the fate of Olynthus and 
exhorted them to repel Philip’s friendly advances*. But Philip’s 
promises were more powerful than the eloquence of Demosthenes, 
and we soon find Argos and Messene (instigated by Philip) sending 
envoys to Athens, complaining that she supported Sparta in preventing 


_ ἢ See the whole speech On the Peace. For remarks on this speech, the genuineness 
of which has often been doubted, see Schaefer 11. 295—303. The striking contrast 
between this and the Second and Third Philippics is to be explained by the difference 
in circumstances, which made the former a political necessity. 

2 Dem. Cor. 44! (see note). 

3 Dem. VI. 22, IX. 12, [vII.] 32;.cf. Cor. 64, 65. For the later tetrarchies in 
Thessaly, see 1X. 26. 

4 See VI. 9, 13, 15, 20—25. 


died eden eel αν tn 


σαν θληόννς 


344 B.c.] SECOND PHILIPPIC OF DEMOSTHENES. 269 


them from gaining their freedom. With these came envoys from Philip, 
complaining that Athens had charged their master with breaking his 
promises’. — 

52. In the assembly which discussed the reply to be given to these 
embassies (late in 344 B.c.), Demosthenes delivered his Second Phi- 
lippic2» This gives a statesmanlike review of Philip’s conduct towards 
Athens since the peace, showing that he had been constantly aggressive 
and deceitful, while Athens had been kept quiet by his partisans in the 
Assembly, who assured her of his goodwill and friendly intentions. He 
proposed a definite answer to the embassies, of which we can judge 
only by the firm character of the speech itself. We hear of no positive 
results of this mission, but we hear no more of the disputes in Pelo- 
ponnesus which caused it. Still, Philip continued to acquire influence 
there, and the governments leaned on him for support and became more 
and more subservient to his wishes. Many Arcadian towns erected 
statues to him, and offered to open their gates to him if he would visit 
them: the Argives were of the same mind*. The Eleans were also 
under his spell; and the party*in power, supported by Philip, murdered 
in cold blood the last remnant of the Phocian mercenaries, who were 
captured in the service of the opposite party’. At about the same time 
(344—343) Philip made an unsuccessful attempt to get possession of 
Megara by the help of his friends Perillus and Ptoeodorus; but the 
scheme failed, and Megara remained independent, probably by the help 
of Athens”. | 

52. In the same year there occurred the summary arrest and 
condemnation of Antiphon, a disfranchised citizen, who offered his 
services to Philip to burn the dockyards at the Piraeus. He was arrested 
by the authority of Demosthenes, who was probably ἐπιστάτης τοῦ 


1 Libanius, Hypoth. to Dem. VI. 

2 Grote (ΧΙ. 615) doubts the presence of envoys from Philip on this occasion, and 
Dion. Hal. (ad Amm. p. 737) speaks only of those from Peloponnesus. Schaefer 
(II. 355) points out that the statement of Libanius is supported by the tone of VI. 28 
—37, which seems to be a reply to some complaints on the part of Philip. 

® Dem. XIX. 261. 

# Diod. xvi. 63; Dem. XIx. 260. For this relic of the Phocian army see § 48 
above). It is probable that the three Elean traitors named in Dem. Cor. 295 belong 
to this time. For Aristratus, tyrant of Sicyon in Philip’s time (Cor. 48, 295), see _ 
Plut. Arat. 13. 

τ τ 71°, XIX. 294, 295: cf. 87, 204, 326, 334, 1X- 17, 27, [X-] 9. Schaefer 
(11. 366) refers the expedition of Phocion to the aid of Megara (Plut. Phoc. 15) 
to this time. Megara appears to be in friendly relation with Athens in 341—340: 
see Dem. IX. 74. 


κω τ τ 
Ἀσὰ. 7 


270 | HISTORICAL SKETCH. [344-- 


ναυτικοῦ or invested with some other magisterial power, and brought 
before the Assembly; but was released on the protest of Aeschines. 
He was again arrested by the intervention of the Areopagus, brought to 
trial and condemned to the rack and to death’. 

54. Not much later? occurred an important trial before the 
Amphictyonic Council, in which the ancient right of Athens to control 
the temple of Delos was contested by the Delians. The Athenians 
chose Aeschines as their counsel in this case; but the Areopagus, to 
which the people had by special vote given the right to revise the 
election, rejected him and chose Hyperides in his place. The election 
was made in the most formal and solemn manner, each senator taking 
his ballot from the altar*. At the trial Hyperides delivered his famous 
Delian oration, in which he defended the cause of Athens so eloquently 
that her rights in the Delian temple remained undisturbed*. The cause 
of Delos was argued by Euthycrates, the traitor who betrayed Olynthus 
to Philip®. Demosthenes attributes the rejection of Aeschines as counsel 
to the effect on the Areopagus of the recent affair of Antiphon: but this 
probably had only intensified the increasing indignation against the 
partisans of Philip, which had recently als οι itself in the con- 
demnation of Philocrates’®. 

55. A little later in 343 B.C. (probably before midsummer) Philip 
sent Python of Byzantium to Athens, to tell the old story of his un- 
alterable friendship and of his grief on hearing the calumnies which his 
enemies reported in the Assembly and the Athenians believed. He 
assured the people that he was ready to revise the peace if there was 
anything amiss in it, and begged them not to believe the orators who 
misrepresented him and his intentions’. Python was an eloquent orator, 


1 See Dem. Cor. 132, 133, with notes. 

2 Schaefer (11. 372—374) with great probability places the Delian contest in the 
spring of 343 B.c., when Demosthenes went to the Amphictyonic Council as πυλάγορος 
of Athens. See Dem. ΧΙΧ. 65: ὅτε viv ἐπορευόμεθα eis Δελφούς (said later in 343), 
and Aesch. III. 113, 114: 

2. Dem, ΟΟΥ 1534. 135% 

4 Some passages of this oration are to be found in the fragments of Hyperides, 
67—75 (Bl.). 

5 See frag. 76 of Hyperides: ὅτι dvrémpate τῇ πόλει περὶ τοῦ ἱεροῦ τοῦ Δηλίων. It 
appears from Apsines (IX. p. 547 W.) that this refers to Euthycrates. 

6 See Essay IV. § 4. 


7 Dem. Cor. 136. For the date of Python’s visit, see Schaefer 11. 377, 378. He © 


identifies this Python with great probability with one of the brothers, Python and 


Heraclides, of Aenos, who murdered Cotys and were afterwards received with honour = 


at Athens: see Dem. XXIII. 118, 110. 


342 B.c.] CASE OF DELOS—MISSION OF PYTHON. 271 


Pa pupil of Isocrates, and his statement of Philip’s grievances moved 

the Assembly greatly’. He was accompanied by envoys from all 
Philip’s allies, and he was supported by Aeschines*. But his “tide of 
eloquence” was stemmed by Demosthenes, who replied to Philip’s 
complaints so effectively that the feeling of the Assembly was soon 


patriotic Athenian, who professed to accept Philip’s offer to revise the 
_ peace and made two propositions to this end®. He proposed (1) that 
the clause which provided that each should keep what they had, ἑκατέρους 
ἔχειν ἃ ἔχουσιν, uti Possidetis, should be changed to each should have their 
own (ἑκατέρους ἔχειν τὰ ἑαυτῶν) ; (2) that the freedom of all Greek states 
not included in the treaty should be recognized by both parties to the 
peace, who should agree to defend them if they were attacked. A 
decree was passed with these two provisions ; and Hegesippus was sent 
with other envoys to Philip to ask his approval of these terms, and 
further to ask for the return to Athens of the island Halonnesus, 
which Philip then held, and for the surrender of the towns in Thrace 
(Serrhium, Doriscus, ete.) which he had taken after the peace was made’. 
This embassy was rudely received by Philip, who ignored all his promises 
about a revision of the peace, and it returned to Athens with nothing 
accomplished. Philip even banished an Athenian poet, Xenoclides, for 
_ the offence of entertaining the embassy in Macedonia”. 

56. Eight or nine months later (early in 342 B.c.) Philip sent a 
_ letter to the Athenians, in which he once more deplored the odium into 
which the misrepresentations of hostile orators had brought him at 
Athens, and gave a tardy reply to some of the demands of Athens’®, 
_ We have the speech of Hegesippus (as we may now safely call it) in the 


1 Aesch. 11. 125, with the Schol. (p. 65, 25). 

2 Dem. Cor. τοῦ"; Epist. Phil. [Dem. x1I.] 18. 

3 Heges. (Dem. VII.) 18, 25, 30, 31. For the authorship of this speech see p. 272, 
note r. Dem. ΧΙΧ. 181, ἐπανορθώσασθαι τὴν εἰρήνην, berets to this proposed revision 
_ of the peace. 

4 Heges. 2, ὅτε πρὸς αὐτὸν ἐπρεσβεύσαμεν, with 36, 37. 

5 Dem. ΧΙΧ. 331. If we can trust a story told by Seneca (de Ira, 111. 23, 2), 

which i is referred to this occasion by Schaefer, of the insolence of Demochares, one of 
the embassy, we can easily pardon Philip for his rude treatment of the whole party. 

; According to this, when Philip politely asked the embassy what he could do for them, 
- Demochares replied, “ Hang yourself.” 

6 This letter, which is now lost, was read to both Senate and Assembly. It must 
not be confused with the later letter of Philip (written in 340 B.C.) of which document 
‘No. ΧΙ]. among the speeches of Demosthenes purports to be a copy. (See § 68.) 


ae 


turned against Python. He was followed by Hegesippus, another - 


272 HISTORICAL SKETCH. [342 


Assembly, in which this letter is discussed’. Philip made the following © 


answers :— 
(1) As to Halonnesus he repeated his former answer to the embassy, 


that he had taken the island from a nest of pirates, not from Athens. 


Still, he would give it to Athens if she would take it as a gift from him. 
He further offered to submit the whole question to arbitration®. 

(2) He proposed a treaty with Athens (σύμβολα) providing for the 
trial of lawsuits between Macedonians and Athenians, claiming, however, 
that the final ratification of such a treaty should be left to himself®. 

(3). He claimed the right to cruise about the Aegean at pleasure, 
and to aid Athens in suppressing piracy—a claim which might embarrass 
Athens in many ways’. 

(4) He denied that he had ever agreed to modify the peace so 
as to allow each party “to hold what belonged to them.” He held 
Amphipolis, for example, by the terms of the peace; and he could not 
allow his right to be questioned®. — 

(5) He agreed that the freedom and independence ot the Greeks 
who were not parties to the peace should be recognized and defended, 
as Athens proposed’®. 

(6) He denied absolutely that he had ever broken any of his 
promises to Athens: indeed, he declared that he had never made any. 
He maintained that he had released all Athenian prisoners of war’. 

(7) He offered to submit to arbitration all questions about places 
alleged to have been captured by him after the peace was made, including 
the dispute about Halonnesus and the quarrel with Cardia: indeed, he 
offered to compel the Cardians to submit to arbitration if they refused”. 

57. Hegesippus in his replies® objects to receiving Halonnesus 
as a gift from Philip while the right of Athens to the island is denied. 
He sees in the offer of σύμβολα to settle lawsuits only a device of Philip 
to secure himself (by some provision of the treaty) against suits for recom- 


1 This (No. vu. in editions of Demosthenes) is now universally recognized as a 
speech of Hegesippus: see Schaefer 11. 440, 441 withn.1. It professes to be made by 
the mover of the two proposals sent to Philip, who was also one of the embassy (2). 
2 Heges. 2—8: see § 66 (below). 

3 Ibid. g—13: see p. 273, n. 2. 

4 Ibid. 14—16. 

* Thid.-18—29. 

§ Tbid. 30-—32. 

7 Ibid. 33—35, 38. 

δ Ibid. 36, 37, 39—44- 

9. He gives the replies in connection with the statements of Philip’s demands. 


ιν 


ag PHILIPS LETTER.—HEGESIPPUS. tet i 


fpense for confiscated property brought by Athenians who were settled in 

“Potidaea at the time of its capture ; these settlers having had a special 

treaty of alliance with Philip, so that they could not legally be treated as 

_ enemies’, He also repudiates with indignation Philip’s claim to the 

right to ratify (i.e. to revise or reject) the treaty after it had been properly 

-made and had been ratified by the Heliastic Court at Athens?. He 

ridicules the idea that Athens needs Philip’s help in suppressing piracy. 

He calls on the people to remember the offers to revise the peace which 

_ Python made to them in Philip’s name. He repeats the old charge 

of breaking promises, and denies that Philip has liberated all his 

_ Athenian captives. He spurns the proposal of arbitration concern- 

_ ing the towns captured by Philip after the peace was made, saying 

' that this is a question of time to be settled by the calendar, not one 

: - for arbitration. 

- Demosthenes also discussed Philip’s letter, objecting to receiving 
Halonnesus as a gift from Philip, and to allowing arbitration as ‘to 
certain claims of Athens. It is probably this speech to which Aeschines 
alludes when he ridicules Demasthenes for “‘quarrelling about syllables*.” 
So far as we know, no result followed these negotiations with Philip, 

except a stronger conviction at Athens of the insincerity of Philip’s 


1 Heges. 9, 10: οὐκ ὄντος αὐτοῖς πολέμου πρὸς Φίλιππον ἀλλὰ συμμαχίας, Kal ὅρκων 
 ὀμωμοσμένων ods Φίλιππος τοῖς οἰκοῦσιν ἐν ἸΤοτειδαίᾳ (sc. ᾿Αθηναίοις) ὦμοσεν. As it was 
generally established that restitution should be made for property confiscated in time 
of peace, Philip naturally desired some special security on this point. It was 
generally provided in σύμβολα that suits should be brought in the defendant’s court 
_ (forum ret), so that suits of this nature would be tried in Macedonia, where Philip 
_ would have ample opportunity to take advantage of any ambiguous provisions in the 
treaty, such as he might easily smuggle in at a final revision. 

2 By the Attic law, such σύμβολα, after they were made by negotiation, like other 
treaties, must be ratified by the Heliastic Court under the presidency of the θεσμοθέται. 
See Heges. 9: ταῦτα δὲ κύρια ἔσεσθαι οὐκ ἐπειδὰν ἐν τῷ δικαστηρίῳ τῷ παρ᾽ ὑμῖν 
κυρωθῇ, ὥσπερ ὁ νόμος κελεύει, GAN ἐπειδὰν ὡς ἑαυτὸν ἐπανενεχθῇ. Aristotle (Pol. 
Ath. 591°) says of the θεσμοθέται, καὶ τὰ σύμβολα τὰ πρὸς τὰς πόλεις οὗτοι κυροῦσι, καὶ 
τὰς δίκας τὰς ἀπὸ τῶν συμβόλων εἰσάγουσι, which may refer to a later law, or may 
(as Meier and Schomann explain it, Att. Proc. p. 999) mean the θεσμοθέται presiding 
over acourt. Pollux (v1II. 88) repeats Aristotle. The passage of Aristotle, interpreted 
in either way, with its distinction of σύμβολα and δίκαι ἀπὸ τῶν συμβόλων, now makes 
“untenable the view of Reiske, which I once followed (Am. Journ. of Philol. 1. 1o—12), 
that ταῦτα in the speech on Halonnesus (above quoted) refers to the δίκαι and not to 
the σύμβολα. See Att. Proc. 1001. It seems that Philip and Athens both claimed the 
right of final ratification, of course with the option of rejecting the treaty altogether. 

8 Aesch. 111. 83: ᾿Αλόννησον ἐδίδου" ὁ δ᾽ ἀπηγόρευε μὴ λαμβάνειν εἰ δίδωσιν ἀλλὰ 
μὴ ἀποδίδωσι, περὶ συλλαβῶν διαφερόμενος. 
G. Ὁ. 18 


274 HISTORICAL SKETCH. [343- 


professions of friendship and of the necessity of ultimately meeting his 
aggressions by force of arms. 

58. The account of the transactions which followed the mission 
of Python has brought us down to the time before midsummer 
342 B.C, when Hegesippus delivered his oration on Halonnesus}. 
We must now recur to events in Euboea which began in the previous 
year. 

The formal peace which Athens made with the towns of Euboea in 
348 B.C. recognized the independence of the island?. Philip saw more 
and more plainly the importance of Euboea as a basis of operations 
against Athens*, and he never lost an opportunity of establishing his 
influence there. In 343—342 he supported Clitarchus, who had made 
himself tyrant of Eretria, and he sent troops to expel the popular party. 
An embassy sent by Athens on the motion of Demosthenes to counteract 
the intrigues of Philip was refused a hearing at Eretria, and the town fell 
into Philip’s power‘. The banished democracy took possession of 
Porthmus, a harbour of Eretria, and Philip sent against them 1000 soldiers 
and destroyed the walls of Porthmus®. He also sent troops to Oreus, 
to establish there the tyrant Philistidés; and under the Macedonian 
influence the popular leader, Euphraeus, was sent to prison, where he 
slew himself to escape the vengeance of his enemies®. Athens, by the 
help of Demosthenes, was more fortunate in establishing her influence 
at Chalcis, where two brothers, Callias and Taurosthenes, who had once 
acted in Philip’s interest, were now firm friends of the Athenians. 
Callias sent an embassy to Athens, and a treaty of alliance was made, 
providing for mutual defence’. The brothers were intimate with Demos- 
thenes, who caused them to be made citizens of Athens. Aeschines 


1 In the late summer or autumn of 343 Aeschines was brought to trial on the 
charge of παραπρεσβεία, and acquitted by a small vote. See Essay IV. § vi 

* See § 14, above. 

® As an ἐπιτείχισμα ἐπὶ τὴν ᾿Αττικήν, Cor. 712, 

# Dem, IX. 57, 58, 66, Cor. 71°, 79"; cf. Cor. 295}, 

P em TK: 12,15 Senet 50. . 

δ Dem. ΙΧ. 59—62, 66, Cor. 81. The somewhat earlier attempt of Philip to secure 
Megara (§ 52) is sometimes connected with his intrigues in Euboea. Both had the 
same object, to weaken Athens. The two are often mentioned together, as in Dem. 


Cor. 71, XIX. 87, 334. For the final overthrow of the despotisms in Euboea by the 


help of Athens in 341—340, see ὃ 64, and note on Dem. Cor. 798. 


” Aesch. II. 91--93. We do not know whether the Athenian embassy which was — 


rejected at Eretria about this time (see note 5, above) was sent also to negotiate | 
with Chalcis; but this is highly probable. This embassy is the one mentioned in ᾿ 


Dem. Cor. 797, ἡνίκ᾽ Εὐβοίας ἥπτετο. 


i 
2 


342 B.C.] EUBOEAN AFFAIRS.—PHILIP IN EPIRUS. 275 


violently attacks Callias as a friend of Demosthenes and an enemy of 
Athens’. 

59. In the winter of 343—342 Philip with a motley force marched 
over the mountains into Epirus, to place Alexander, brother of his 
queen Olympias, on the throne. Neoptolemus, Alexander’s father, 
had reigned there jointly with his brother Arybbas, in whose house - 
Alexander and Olympias had been brought up. After his brother’s 
death Arybbas reigned alone. Philip soon expelled his uncle-in-law 
from his throne, and made Alexander king*. He thus made the settle- 
ment of a family quarrel the means of extending his own influence to the 
_lonian Sea. He captured three Elean towns in Cassopia, in the south 
of Epirus, and gave them to Alexander*. He was now on the borders 
of Ambracia, and he also threatened to attack Leucadia and to cross 
into Peloponnesus. He made a treaty with the Aetolians, in which he 
agreed to restore to them Naupactus, which the Achaeans then held. 
In these later schemes he was foiled by Athens, which sent Demosthenes 
and other envoys to urge Corinth and Achaea to defend their rights ἡ. 
She also sent troops to Acarnania®, Athens received the dethroned 

Arybbas with great honour, but nothing appears to have been done to 
_ restore him to his dominions’. 
60. On his return from Epirus, Philip entered Thessaly, where he 
had previously established a decadarchy (see ὃ 51). He now appointed 
_tetrarchs, one for each of the original districts of Thessaly,—Thessaliotis, 
Phthiotis, Pelasgiotis, Hestiaeotis’. This completed the subjugation of 
Thessaly, which had been one of his main objects since his attack on 
the despots of Pherae in 352-525. At about this time (342) Philip 
sent for Aristotle and made him the tutor of his son Alexander, who was 


1 Hyper. in Dem., Col. xx.: τούτους yap ἔγραψε Δημοσθένης ᾿Αθηναίους εἷναι καὶ 
χρῆται τούτοις πάντων μάλιστα. So Dinarch. 1. 44; Aesch. 111. 85—97. Demosthenes 
makes no formal reply to these charges. 

_ ? See Paus. 1. 11°-*, giving many details of the family history; Just. vir. 6, 
eyiit. 6. I . 

= Heges. 32: see Schaefer II. 426 (notes). 

Ὁ Dem. IX. 27, 34, 72: both Leucadia and Ambracia were Corinthian colonies. 
For Naupactus see § 78 (below), p. 294, with ἢ, 3. 

᾿ς δ Dem. ΧΙΥ͂ΠΙ. 24 (343—342 B.C.; see 6 ἄρχων Πυθόδοτος in 26). 

δ See decree in his honour in C. I. Att. 11. no. 115. 

7 Dem. IX. 26: Θετταλία πῶς ἔχει; οὐχὶ τὰς πολιτείας Kal Tas πόλεις αὐτῶν 
παρήρηται καὶ τετραρχίας κατέστησεν, ἵνα μὴ μόνον κατὰ πόλεις ἀλλὰ καὶ κατ᾽ ἔθνη 
δουλεύωσιν ; cf. Cor. 48, 295. 
8 See § 6 (above). 

ν᾿ 18—2 


276 HISTORICAL SKETCH, [342- 


now fourteen years old’. In this year he gave great offence to Greece 
by sending a deputy to hold the Pythian games in his name’. 

61. Early in 342 B.c. Philip undertook to complete his conquest of 
Thrace, and especially to wrest from Athens her control of the Thracian 
Chersonese. ‘This ancient possession of Athens was equally important 
to her as a protection to her trade with the Euxine, and to Philip as a 
point of departure for invading Asia. Soon after the peace, Athens had 
sent a body of settlers to the Chersonese under Diopithes*, an able and 
enterprising general, who was determined to defend the rights of Athens 
to the last extremity and to brook no interference from Philip. The 
Cardians, who had been admitted to the peace in 346 as Philip’s allies 
by the consent of the Athenian embassy, annoyed the Athenian settlers 
in every possible way. Philip sent troops to aid the Cardians, and 
Diopithes raised an army in Thrace to attack them. With this force he 
invaded Philip’s territory beyond Cardia*. Against this Philip protested 
vehemently in a letter to the Athenians’, and a meeting of the Assembly 
was held to consider the question. In this Demosthenes delivered his 
eloquent oration on the Affairs of the Chersonese. He admits that the 
action of Diopithes has not been precisely peaceful, but maintains that 
Philip has broken all the terms of the peace and that Athens is really 
at war with him by his own act. He stoutly objects to making any con- 


cessions to Philip at this crisis, and above all he protests against recalling — 


Diopithes or passing any vote which might discredit him or his conduct 
in Thrace. 

62. Soon after this speech, certainly before midsummer 341, De- 
mosthenes delivered his Third Philippic. This powerful argument deals 
with the whole history of Philip’s aggressions since the peace was made, 
and enforces the argument of the speech on the Chersonese. He 
declares that Athens has been actually at war with Philip for a long 
time, indeed ever since the destruction of the Phocians®. He earnestly 


1 Plut. Alex. 7; Diog. Laert. v. 1, 7, ἐπὶ Πυθοδότου (343—342). Alexander was 
born July 21, 356 (see § 3). 

2 To this refers the indignant remark in Dem. Ix. 32, τοὺς δούλους ἀγωνοθετήσοντας 
πέμπει. 

3 Dem. VIII. 6, IX. 15: see Schaefer 11. 451, notes. 

* For a full discussion of these important events, which led directly to the renewal 
of the war with Philip, see the two orations of Demosthenes On the Chersonese (VIII. a 
and the Third Philippic (1x.). See Grote x1. 623—625; Schaefer 11. 450—455. 

ὅ Dem. vill. τό, 1x16, 27; Hypoth. to viii. p. 808. 

® Dem. ΙΧ. 19: ἀφ᾽ ἧς ἡμέρας ἀνεῖλε Φωκέας, ἀπὸ ταύτης ἔγωγ᾽ αὐτὸν rode ney 
ὁρίζομαι. See also IX. 9, 15—18, and many similar passages in this speech. 


. 


q 


341 B.c.| DEM. ON CHERSONESE.—THIRD PHILIPPIC. 277 


_ beseeches the people to recognize this fact and to prepare for active 
warfare’. He makes no attempt to justify the recent proceedings of 
Athens in the Chersonese, except as measures of defensive war, to which 
Philip’s offensive acts of war have driven her. It would be madness, he 
urges, for the Athenians to allow Philip to wage war on them and not to 
defend themselves by arms. 

The whole tone of the Third Philippic shows that Demosthenes — 
had no longer the least expectation of maintaining even a nominal 
peace ; while the increasing boldness of Philip’s aggressions shows that 
__ he merely aimed at securing all possible advantages before the inevitable 
declaration of war’. 

| 63. We have only meagre and scattered accounts of the events of 
_ the year 341—340, before the outbreak of the war. One important 

result of the discussions in the Assembly and the powerful arguments 

of Demosthenes was that Athens now universally recognized his leader- 

ship and gave him almost complete control of her foreign affairs. For 

this department, from this time until the battle of Chaeronea, he declares 

himself responsible in the fullest sense®. One of his wisest strokes of 
policy was his forestalling of Philip’s designs on Byzantium by his embassy 

thither, probably in the early summer of 341. He thus secured for 

Athens the friendship and alliance of that important city, the control of 
the Hellespont, and the protection of her trade with the Euxine. Athens 

and Byzantium had had so many grounds of enmity, especially since 

the Social War, that it now required no ordinary diplomatic skill to 

bring them into friendship*. About the same time he negotiated an 

_ alliance with Abydos, an old enemy of Athens, and visited the “kings 


1 See ΙΧ. 7o—end, 
* There is an interesting decree of 341—340 B.C. concerning Elaeus, a town on the 
southern point of the Chersonese, in C. I. Att. 11. no. 116: εἶναι καὶ τοῖς ᾿Ελαιουσίοις 
7a αὐτὰ ἅπ[ερ] ὁ δῆμος ἐψήφισται τοῖς Χερρ[ονη]σίταις" τὸν δὲ στρατηγὸν Xd[pyra] 
ἐπιμεληθῆναι αὐτῶν ἐν τῷ [τρόπ]ῳ τῷ αὐτῷ ὅπως ἂν éxovt[es ᾿Ελα]ιούσιοι τὰ αὐτῶν ὀρθῶς 
κ[αὶ δικ]αίως οἰκῶσιν μετὰ ᾿Αθηναί[ων ἐν ΧἸερρονήσῳ, καὶ καλέσαι το[ὺς ᾿Ελα]ιουσίους ἐπὶ 
δεῖπνον ei[s τὸ πρυτανεῖον εἰς αὔριον. In no. 7or Elaeus and other towns in the 
_Chersonese are recorded as offering crowns to the people of Athens in 347—346. See 
Ὁ. Curtius in Hermes tv. 407. Cf. Dem. ΧΧΠΙ. 138. Schaefer (11. 482) refers 
Ὁ. Att. nos. 136 and 137 to this time. 
᾿ς ὃ Dem. Cor. 59, 88, 218, 298 (ueyiorwv...mpoords): in Cor. 320 he compares his 
power at this period with his humble position after Chaeronea, when Aeschines and 
his party again became powerful and insolent. Aeschines (11. 130) alludes to 
Demosthenes before Chaeronea as ἐμπιμπλάμενος τῆς δεδομένης ὑφ᾽ ὑμῶν αὐτῷ 
ἐξουσίας. ) 
4 Dem. Cor. 88, 94, 244; Aesch. III. 256. 


278 HISTORICAL SKETCH. tagger 


of Thrace,” probably Cersobleptes and Teres, who were soon after- 
wards dethroned by Philip’. Later in 341—340 an embassy was sent 
to the King of Persia, perhaps on the suggestion of Demosthenes, asking 
for help against Philip ; but this was not well received by the King, who 
sent back to Athens a very insulting letter, refusing his assistance”. 
Embassies were sent also to Rhodes, under Hyperides, and probably to 
Chios, the effects of which were seen in the help sent to Byzantium 
when she was besieged by Philip’. 

Even more important were the embassies to Peloponnesus which 
were undertaken by Demosthenes with Callias of Chalcis. These 


resulted in the formation of a powerful league against Philip, which, 


according to Aeschines, proposed to raise 100 talents, and to equip 
100 ships of war, 10,000 foot soldiers, and tooo horsemen, besides 
2000 militia from Peloponnesus and 2000 from Acarnania. The leader- 
ship of the league was given to Athens, and a formal meeting of the 
allies at Athens was appointed for the 16th of Anthesterion (March 9) 
340 B.C.“ We have no further mention of this synod, and we may fairly 
assume that it was never held. But the proposed forces appear to have 
been actually raised, as Demosthenes gives the number of the allies in 
the field as 15,000 mercenaries and 2000 cavalry, besides the militia®. 


1 Dem. Cor. 302°; XXIII. 158, ᾿Αβύδου τῆς τὸν ἅπανθ᾽ ὑμῖν χρόνον ἐχθρᾶς. For 
the Kings of Thrace see Epist. Phil. 8---το. 

* See Epist. Phil. 6: this shows that the result of the Persian mission was not yet 
known. See below, ὃ 67, n.2. Aeschines (111. 238) probably refers to the 
King’s reply: ἐγὼ ὑμῖν χρυσίον οὐ δώσω" μή με αἰτεῖτε" οὐ yap λήψεσθε. On the 
contrary, in Vit. x. Orat. 847 F, 848 E, the King is said to have sent 3000 darics to 
Demosthenes, and also a gift to Hyperides. (A daric, or gold stater, by weight of 
gold, would be about-£1. 25. rod.) Aristotle (Rhet. 11. 8, 11) mentions money sent 
by the King to Diopithes, which came ‘after his death. See Schaefer 11. 483. It is 


hard to see why, on the eve of a war with Philip, there was any crime in receiving ~ 
money or other help from Persia, to be used against a common enemy. ‘Persian — 


gold” was still a phrase for demagogues to conjure by, a century and a half after the 
term had any real meaning, as “‘ British gold ” still is in certain quarters in the United 
States. 

> Dem. IX. 71: ἐκπέμπωμεν πρέσβεις [πανταχοῖ, εἰς Πελοπόννησον, eis Ρόδον, 
εἰς Χίον, ὡς βασιλέα λέγω]. Vit. Χ. Orat. (Hyper.), p. 850A: ἐπρέσβευσε δὲ καὶ πρὸς 
Ῥοδίους. A λόγος ‘Podiaxéds and probably a Χιακός of Hyperides are mentioned: see 
frag. 161 and 194 (Bl.), and Bohnecke, Forschungen 1. p. 461 (with note, p. 657). 
Diod. XVI. 77 mentions help sent to Byzantium by Chios, Cos, and Rhodes, the three 
islands which had joined her in the Social War. See Schaefer 11. 484, n. 2. 

* Aesch. III. 94—98; Schaefer 11. 486—4809. 

δ Dem. Cor. 237, where he includes the later Theban allies. He also includes the 
Leucadians and Corcyraeans, and omits the Ambraciots. For the Acarnanians see 


320 B.c.] CALLJAS—LIBERATION OF EUBOEA. 279 


64. These vigorous preparations, which preceded the open outbreak 
_of the war, amply justify the boasts of Demosthenes about the allies and 
‘the revenues which were raised for Athens by his influence’. One of 
the most important results of the close union between Demosthenes and 
 Callias was the formal alliance of Athens and the cities of Euboea, 
_ which grew out of the treaty for mutual defence made two years before’. 
This alliance was made on a new basis. Instead of bringing back the © 
Euboeans to the Athenian confederacy as tributaries, the wise policy of 
- Demosthenes established a new Euboean confederacy, with Chalcis at 
_ its head, as an independent ally of Athens. Aeschines represents this 
as a corrupt bargain, by which Demosthenes, for a bribe of three talents, 
cheated Athens out of ten talents of revenue which she ought to have 
received from Eretria and Oreus*. ‘This alliance was closely connected 
_ with the expulsion of the two tyrants whom Philip had supported at 
_ Oreus and Eretria. In the summer of 341, on the motion of Demo- 
sthenes, an expedition was sent to Euboea, which with help from Chalcis 
and Megara freed Oreus from the tyrant Philistides, who was put to 


_ Aesch. 111. 256. The ᾿Αριθμὸς βοηθειῶν (Dem. Cor. 305) probably contained all the 
forces raised directly or indirectly by Demosthenes. See Cor. 301, 302; and Vit. x. 
Orat. pp. 845 A, 851 A (decree). 

1 Dem. Cor. 234—237. 

2 See § 58. 

3 Aesch. III. 94, 100. The nature of the alliance is shown by the criticisms 
of Aeschines. He sarcastically speaks of the embassy to Eretria, proposed by 
- Demosthenes in his decree ‘‘longer than the Iliad,’’ as sent to beg the Eretrians 
to pay their assessment (σύνταξιν) not to Athens, but to Callias. This signifies that 
Clitarchus was making a last effort to maintain himself by contributing to the new 
Euboean confederation. Aeschines offers, as proof of a bribe of a talent promised (but 
~ not paid) by Oreus to Demosthenes, a decree of that city pledging him the public 
revenues for the payment of that sum with twelve per cent. interest (104). That the 
᾿ payment of a bribe should be secured in this public manner is too absurd a story to 
be seriously discussed. Schaefer (11. 491, 492) finds a most probable explanation. of 
the decree of Oreus in two Attic inscriptions. In C. I. Att. 11. no. 804 Ba (334— 
333 B.C.), twenty-three Athenians, among them Demosthenes, are named as ἐγγυηταί. 
Kohler says of the mutilated introduction, 0eo0...yyunrat 7, ‘‘ suspiceris scriptum fuisse 
ἐπὶ Θεοφράστου ἄρχοντος" ἐγγυηταὶ τούτων x.t.r.” This is made almost certain by 
‘no. 809 ¢, 42 (325—324 B.C.), where payments are recorded from 15 of the same men, 
‘including Demosthenes, παρὰ τῶν ἐγγυητῶν τῶν τριήρων ὧν οἱ Χαλκιδῆς ἔλαβον 
ἀπελάβομεν. These men evidently had given security for money advanced by Athens 
to Chalcis, in 340—339 B.C., to enable her to supply her quota of ships to the new 
confederacy; and it is probable that Demosthenes was likewise security for a talent 
lent to Oreus for the same purpose, and that the town gave him security for the 
principal and interest. We may well say, with Aeschines (111. 75), καλὸν, καλὸν 7) τῶν 
δημοσίων γραμμάτων φυλακή. 


280 ALISTORICAL SKLT CH [341- 


death’, Several months later a more decisive expedition was sent 
under Phocion. On a report that Philip was about to invade Euboea 
with his fleet, Hyperides raised a fleet of forty ships for Athens by 
voluntary contributions. He gave two triremes, one for himself and 
one for his son*. Though Philip made no attack on Euboea, this fleet 
was sent under Phocion, on the motion of Demosthenes, to liberate 
Eretria from Philip’s tyrant Clitarchus. This was soon effected, and 
Clitarchus was put to death*®. This completed the liberation of Euboea 
from despotism and from Philip’s influence, and made the island a 


- firm friend and supporter of Athens. The Athenians expressed their 


gratitude to Demosthenes for these successful labours by the gift of 
a crown of gold, which was conferred in the theatre, at the Great 
Dionysia of 340, in the very terms which were subsequently used by 
Ctesiphon in his own decree’. 

65. About this time, a man from Oreus, Anaxinus, who came to 
Athens ostensibly to make purchases for Queen Olympias, was arrested 
as a spy and examined under torture through the action of Demosthenes, 
who also moved his condemnation to death. Aeschines mentions this 
proceeding as an outrage upon an innocent visitor, whose hospitality 
Demosthenes had once enjoyed at Oreus ; and he implies that the affair 


* Dem. Cor. 798, τὴν ἐπ’ Ὠρεὸν ἔξοδον: cf. 87. Charax fr. 31 (Miill. 111. 643): 
᾿Αθηναῖοι dua Χαλκιδεῦσι...καὶ Μεγαρεῦσι στρατεύσαντες εἰς "Qpedv Φιλιστίδην τὸν 
τύραννον ἀπέκτειναν καὶ ᾿Ὦρείτας ἠλευθέρωσαν. Schaefer 11. 491, n. 1, quotes the new 
scholia on Aesch. 111. 85 (Jahrb. fiir Philol. 1866, p. 28), assigning June 341 as the 
date of this event. In Dem. Ix. 66 (before midsummer 341) we find Philistides in full 
power at Oreus. 

* Vit. xX. Orat. 850 A (Hyper. 24): Φιλίππου δὲ πλεῖν ἐπ᾽ Εὐβοίας παρεσκευασμένου, 
καὶ τῶν ᾿Αθηναίων εὐχαβῶς ἐχόντων, τεσσαράκοντα τριήρεις ἤθροισεν ἐξ ἐπιδόσεως, καὶ 
πρῶτος ὑπὲρ αὑτοῦ καὶ τοῦ παιδὸς ἐπέδωκε δύο τριήρεις. In the next year (340—339) 
we find Hyperides an affoinded trierarch in command of an ἐπιδόσιμος τριήρης, named 
᾿Ανδρεία : see C. I. Att. 11. no. 809 d, 236 (also 808c, 98), τῶν μετὰ Φωκίωνος καὶ 
Κηφισοφώντος πλευσασῶν ἐπιδόσιμος τριήρης ’Avdpela* τριήραρχος Ὑπερείδης, with 
Vit. X. Orat. 848 E (Hyperides, 5), τριήραρχός τε αἱρεθεὶς ὅτε Βυζάντιον ἐπολιόρκει 
Φίλιππος, βοηθὸς Βυζαντίοις ἐκπεμφθείς κιτλ. Hyperides probably commanded at 
Byzantium one of the triremes which he had given for Euboea the year before. 

* Diod. Xvi. 74 (under 341—340 B.C.) : Φωκίων μὲν κατεπολέμησε Κλείταρχον τὸν 
Ἐρετρίας τύραννον καθεσταμένον ὑπὸ Φιλίππου. See new schol. to Aesch. Il. 103 
(note 1, above): ἐπ᾽ ἄρχοντος Νικομάχου (341—340), Φιλίππου βασιλεύοντος ἔτος κ΄, 
᾿Αθηναῖοι στρατεύσαντες εἰς Εὔβοιαν Φωκίωνος στρατηγοῦντος τόν τε τύραννον τῶν 
᾿Ερετριέων Κλείταρχον ἀπέκτειναν καὶ τὴν πόλιν τοῖς ᾿Ερετριεῦσι παρέδωκαν καὶ Snuo- 
κρατίαν κατέστησαν. (See Schaefer 11. 495, n. 3.) Eretria was probably freed in the 
spring of 340 B.c. 

+ See Dem. Cor. 832-4, with note. 


340 B.c.] ANAXINUS—SIEGE OF PERINTHUS. . 281 


_ interfered in some way with an εἰσαγγελία which he was about to bring 
against Demosthenes. Demosthenes alludes to the case chiefly to 
mention that Aeschines was detected in a private interview with Anaxinus 
in the house of one Thrason: and the suspicion thus cast on the 
patriotism of Aeschines may have caused him prudently to abandon 
his prosecution of Demosthenes. Schaefer is probably right in con- 
necting this affair with the efforts of Philip to maintain his ascendency 
in Euboea’. 
66. ‘The dispute between Athens and Philip about Halonnesus in 
343—342 left the island in Philip’s hands, as Athens refused to take it 
as a gift from him, while he refused to “restore” it. At last, probably 
in 341—340, the people of Peparethus seized Halonnesus and made 
the Macedonian garrison prisoners. Philip soon avenged this act by 
sending a fleet to ravage Peparethus. Athens then directed her com- 
_ manders to make ως upon Philip. This shortly preceded the 
_ outbreak of the war’. 
Before midsummer 340 it was generally recognized ie teeits 
Greece that war was inevitable. At the Olympic games of this year, 
_ it is said, the name of Philip was received with hisses and other insults*. 
Philip was then engaged in the conquest of Thrace, and had come to 
the point where the possession of Byzantium was indispensable to him 
- if he was to invade Persia and secure a safe passage for his army into 
_ Asia Minor and a safe return. It was also of the utmost importance 
for him to become master of the grain traffic of the Euxine. He now 
called on the Byzantines, as his friends and former allies, to promise 
him their aid in his pending war with Athens. But here his way was 
blocked by the alliance already made by Demosthenes with Byzantium, 
and she refused to join him*. Upon this he resolved to secure her by 
force ; and he began by attacking the neighbouring city of Perinthus on 
the Propontis. To this end he sent his fleet through the Hellespont, 
and he guarded it against attack during its passage by marching an 


1 Aesch. III. 223, 224; Dem. Cor. 137. Demosthenes must have acted here in 
some official capacity, as in the case of Antiphon in 344 (see § 53, above). Demosthenes 
was probably a guest of Anaxinus on some official visit to Oreus, perhaps on one of 
he embassies of 346 (see Dem. XIX. 155, 163), when Anaxinus may have been the 
πρόξενος of Athens. The reply of Demosthenes to Aeschines with regard to the 
‘violation of hospitality is thus given (Aesch. 111. 224): ἔφησθα τοὺς τῆς πόλεως 
ἅλας περὶ πλείονος ποιήσασθαι τῆς ξενικῆς τραπέζης. 

2? Dem. Cor. 70!: see the Schol. (p. 248°); Epist. Phil. [Dem. ΧΙ1.] 12, 1 

® Plut. Moral. p. 457 F, Phil. Apophth. (26), p. 179 A. 

4 See § 63 (above); Dem. Cor. 87. 


282 HISTORICAL SKETCH, [340 


army through the Chersonese to keep the Athenians well employed on 
shore’. 

67. Perinthus was attacked vigorously (probably late in the summer 
of 340) by land and by sea, but it was also vigorously defended. 
Though Philip brought to the siege an army of 30,000 men, besides 
his large fleet, and employed the most improved engines of war and 
towers two hundred feet high, the defenders were finally successful. 
They were constantly aided by their neighbours of Byzantium, and at 
last by a force sent by the King of Persia?; though no help came from 
Athens or any other Greek city. Philip at length decided to abandon 
the siege. But he still hoped to surprise Byzantium, which was his real 
object, by a sudden attack. The better and larger part of the Byzantine 
army was at Perinthus, and the people who were left at home were 
little to be feared. He therefore left about half his army at Perinthus, 
under his best commander, to make a show of continuing the siege, 
while he hastened with the rest to Byzantium and began to besiege it 
(in the autumn of 340) with all his skill. The Byzantines were at first 
greatly alarmed ; but timely help came to them from a powerful friend. 
Athens was now openly at war with Philip, and her naval power soon 
came to the help of her new ally. A fleet under Chares, which was 
previously cruising in the northern Aegean, was sent to Byzantium, and 
was followed by another under Phocion, which was more powerful and 
more efficient. Chios, Cos, and Rhodes also sent their help. Byzantium 
was rescued, and Philip wisely abandoned this second siege®, By some 


1 Cor. 139%. See Epist. Phil. 16: ἠναγκάσθην αὐτὰς παραπέμψαι διὰ Χερρονήσου 
τῇ στρατιᾷ. : 

* Whether this efficient help to Perinthus was the result of the Athenian embassy 
which Ochus repulsed a year earlier (see § 63) is not known. The King now seems to 
take great personal interest in checking Philip. See Diod. xvi. 75: ὁ βασιλεὺς... 
ἔγραψε πρὸς τοὺς ἐπὶ θαλάττῃ σατράπας βοηθεῖν Mepis παντὶ σθένει. Cf. Paus. 1. 
29,10. In Alexander’s letter, Arrian 11. 14, 5, Ochus himself is said to have sent a 
force distinct from that sent by his satraps: Περινθίοις ἐβοηθήσατε, οἱ τὸν ἐμὸν πατέρα 
ἠδίκουν, Kai eis Θράκην, ἧς ἡμεῖς ἤρχομεν, δύναμιν ἔπεμψεν Ὦχος. 

Ὁ For the details of the sieges of Perinthus and Byzantium, of which only the 
latter is mentioned by Demosthenes (Cor. 71, 87), and for Philip’s improved engines 
of war, see Schaefer 11, 502, 503, 507—513, with the authorities cited. The in- 
scriptions in C. I. Att. 11. nos. 808 c, 82, and 809 d, 220 and 236—238 (also in 
Boeckh, Seewesen, pp. 442, 498) show that Chares was in command of a fleet 
in 341—340, and Phocion in 340—339. As we know that Chares was present 
at the siege of Byzantium, which began in 340—339, it appears that his command 


extended into this year. See Porphyr. Tyr. (Miiller 111. p. 692): συμμαχούντων — 


δὲ Βυζαντίοις ᾿Αθηναίων διὰ Χάρητος στρατηγοῦ, ἀποτυχὼν ὁ Φίλιππος ἐπὶ Χερρόνησον 


= 


Pac] PHILIP AND ATHENS AT WAR. 283 


skilful device his fleet eluded the Athenian ships in the Bosporus and 
escaped into the Aegean’. He left the greater part of his army for a 
time before Byzantium, and went with the rest to the Chersonese, partly 
to harass the Athenian settlers there and partly to protect his fleet in its - 
passage through the Hellespont’. 

68. The peril of Perinthus and Byzantium had probably hastened 
the formal acknowledgment by Athens of the actual state of war between 
herself and Philip. In the late summer or early autumn of 340, probably 


after the siege of Perinthus was begun, Philip sent to the Athenians a 


long letter, full of complaints of their aggressions and justifications of his 
οὐ To this communication, which ended in a declaration of war’, 
Athens replied only by her own declaration of war and a vote to remove 
the column on which the treaty of 346 B.c. was inscribed*. The special 


χωρεῖ, καὶ ταύτην λαβὼν ἐπανῆλθε. See note 2 (below). See also Hesych. Miles. 
frag. 28 (Miiller Iv. p. 151). Plutarch (Phoc. 14) speaks of Chares as inefficient and as 
despised by the enemy; but other (later) authorities take a different view. Hesych. 
Miles. (above cited), of the sixth century, represents Chares as holding the headland 
between Chrysopolis and Chalcedon (now Scutari), opposite the Golden Horn, and 
thus commanding the entrance to Byzantium. On this headland Damalis, the wife of 
Chares, was buried; and her monument, with a heifer (δάμαλις) on an altar, was seen 
by Hesychius. Chares is said to have driven the Macedonian fleet into the Euxine. 
For the siege of Byzantium, and the help brought by Phocion, see Plut. Phoc. 14. 
Demosthenes always speaks with great pride of this relief of Byzantium, which he had 
effected: Cor. 80, 87, 88, 93, 302. He himself gave a trireme to the fleet sent 
to Byzantium: see Vit. X. Orat. 851 A (decree). 

1 See Schaefer 11. 514, with explanation of Polyaenus (IV. 2, 21). 

* See Porph. Tyr., quoted in n. 3, p. 282, and Justin 1x. 1: profectus cum fortis- 
simis multas Chersonensi urbes expugnat. 

% A document purporting to be this letter appears as no. XII. among the orations 
of Demosthenes. This is accepted as genuine, at least in substance, by Grote, Weil, 
and Blass, though not by Schaefer, who thinks it is the work of a rhetorician, 
though based on good materials. Of course the document found in Cor. 77, 78 is 
spurious. 

4 See the last sentence, ὑμᾶς ἀμυνοῦμαι μετὰ τοῦ δικαίου x.7.d. (this declaration 
is without qualification). 

® See Philochorus in Dion. Hal. ad Amm. I. pp. 740, 741 (frag. 135, Miiller 1. 


ΟΡ. 406): Θεόφραστος ᾿Αλλαιεύς " ἐπὶ τούτου (i.e. 340—339 B.C.) Φίλιππος τὸ μὲν πρῶτον 


ἀναπλεύσας ἸΪερίνθῳ προσέβαλεν, ἀποτυχὼν δ᾽ ἐντεῦθεν Βυζάντιον ἐπολιόρκει, καὶ 
μηχανήματα προσῆγεν. Dion. Hal. proceeds: "ἔπειτα διεξελθὼν ὅσα τοῖς ᾿Αθηναίοις 
ὁ Φίλιππος ἐνεκάλει διὰ τῆς ἐπιστολῆς, καὶ Δημοσθένους παρακαλέσαντος αὐτοὺς πρὸς τὸν 
πόλεμον καὶ ψηφίσματα γράψαντος, ἐχειροτόνησε τὴν μὲν στήλην καθελεῖν τὴν περὶ 
τῆς πρὸς Φίλιππον εἰρήνης καὶ συμμαχίας σταθεῖσαν, ναῦς δὲ πληροῦν καὶ τὰ ἄλλα 


ἐνεργεῖν τὰ τοῦ πολέμου. In this valuable fragment it is obvious that there is 
_ some corruption or omission in the words Δημοσθένους...ἐχειροτόνησε. ψηφίσματα is 
_ commonly changed to ψήφισμα, thus making the passage confirm the statement 


284 HISTORICAL SKETCH [34ο- 


occasion alleged by Demosthenes for the declaration of war was the 
capture of some, Athenian merchant ships by Philip’s cruisers in the 
Hellespont’; but war had been an avowed fact on both sides many 
weeks before it was declared. 

When the Byzantine war was ended by the help of Athens and the 
wise counsels of Demosthenes, the gratitude of Perinthus, Byzantium, 
and the towns in the Chersonese was expressed to Athens as their 
deliverer by votes of thanks and crowns?. 

69. When Philip returned from his expedition to the Chersonese 
to his camp before Byzantium, he withdrew his army from that neigh- 
bourhood. We have very scanty accounts of his movements from this’ 
time (probably early in 339 B.c.) until we find him the next summer 
fighting with the Scythians and the Triballi. We can only conjecture 
why, just at the beginning of a war with Athens on the success of which 
everything was staked, and after suffering two mortifying repulses, Philip 


of Aeschines (III. 55) that Demosthenes proposed the declaration of war (ἔγραψε τὸν 
πόλεμον). But Demosthenes (Cor. 76) most emphatically denies this, though he 
claims the authorship of the chief measures which really led to the war. This is 
consistent with ψηφίσματα γράψαντος, referring generally to war measures; but it is 
incredible that war was actually declared on his motion, as this would be a notorious 
matter of record which he could not deny and had no motive for denying. Further, 
ἐχειροτόνησε (sc. ὁ δῆμοΞ) may be the beginning of a new quotation from Philochorus, 
so that no emendations are needed, though the preceding sentence is incomplete. 
The στήλη on which the treaty of 346 was inscribed is mentioned in Dem. VIII. 
5 (end) and Epist. Phil. 8. 

1 Dem. Cor. 73; Diod. xvi. 77: ἐπὶ δὲ τούτων (340—339 B.C.) Φιλίππου Βυζάντιον 
πολιορκοῦντος ᾿Αθηναῖοι μὲν ἔκριναν τὸν Φίλιππον λελυκέναι τὴν πρὸς αὐτοὺς συντεθεῖσαν 
εἰρήνην, εὐθὺς δὲ καὶ δύναμιν ναυτικὴν ἀξιόλογον ἐξέπεμψαν τοῖς Βυζαντίοις, Diodorus 
thus puts the declaration of war while the siege of Byzantium was going on. This 
agrees with the facts that Athens sent no help to Perinthus, but when Byzantium was 
attacked she immediately sent her fleet under Chares to defend it. It is true that 
Philip’s letter does not mention the siege of Perinthus; but it does mention (16) the 
passage of Philip’s army through the Chersonese ‘‘ to escort his fleet,” which was on 
its way to attack Perinthus. This shows (so far as the document is authority) that the 
letter was probably written during the siege of Perinthus, so that the response of 
Athens, the most important part of which was the zmmediate sending (Diod.) of her 
fleet to Byzantium, was probably made when the news of its siege first came to Athens 
(in the autumn of 340). Again, the allusion in the letter (6, 7) to the appeal of Athens 
to the King of Persia for help, without mentioning the efficient aid sent by him to 


Perinthus (see 67), shows that the letter was written before the siege was raised. We — 
can thus reduce the date of the letter and of the declaration of war which followed it — 


to very narrow limits. Although the quotations from Philochorus (in note 5, p. 283) 
mention the letter and the declaration of war after doth sieges, there is nothing to 
show that he placed the events themselves in this order. 

> Dem. Cor. 89—93. The votes were read to the court. 


- 


ee i ae κυ λυγον- 


389 B.C.] TRIERARCHIC REFORM. 285 


should have undertaken an expedition against these outside barbarians, 
leaving Athens and Demosthenes to enjoy the fruits of their diplomatic 
successes. He may have felt the necessity of protecting his possessions 
in Thrace, or even Macedonia itself, against a possible invasion from 
the north; or he may have merely wished to give his defeated troops a 
taste of easy victory and rich booty. An unimportant quarrel with Ateas, 
a Scythian king, gave him a ground for invading his dominions; and 
the king himself—according to one account, nearly ninety years old— 
was defeated on the Danube and killed. Philip carried off as booty 
20,000 boys and women, much cattle, and 20,000 breeding mares. On 
his return from Scythia, he passed through the country of the Triballi, 
with whom he had previously been in conflict’. These warlike moun- 
taineers attacked him furiously; and in the battle he was severely 
wounded, his horse was killed under him, and he was thought to be 
_ dead. In the panic which followed, the Triballi took possession of the 
! precious booty from Scythia. ~Thus again humiliated, Philip returned 
ΐ to Macedonia in the course of the summer of 339”. 
ἕ About the time of the renewal of war with Philip, Demosthenes 
proposed and carried his important trierarchic reform, by which the 
᾿ navy of Athens was put on a new footing and many old abuses were 
corrected. It was under this new system of trierarchy that all the fleets 
were fitted out during the war, and its success in removing grievances 
is described by Demosthenes with glowing pride and satisfaction’. 


VY. THE WAR WITH PHILIP, FROM 340 B.C. TO THE BATTLE 
OF CHAERONEA IN 338. 


70. When Philip returned from Scythia in the summer of 339 Β.0.; 
he found that the war had been waged on both sides for nearly a year 
without decisive results. Though the Athenians had generally been 


1 See Dem. Cor. 44! with note, and § 51 (above). 

2 Our only account of this Scythian expedition, except a few incidental allusions, 
is found in Justin 1x. 2 and prologue to 1x. See also Lucian, Macrob. 11: ’Aréas δὲ 
Σκυθῶν βασιλεὺς μαχόμενος πρὸς Φίλιππον περὶ τὸν Ἴστρον ποταμὸν ἔπεσεν, ὑπὲρ τὰ 
ἐνενήκοντα ἔτη γεγονώς. The brief story is confirmed by Aeschines (III. 128), when 
he says of Philip in the summer of 339, οὐκ ἐπιδημοῦντος ἐν Μακεδονίᾳ Φιλίππου, ἀλλ᾽ 
οὐδ᾽ ἐν τῇ Ἑλλάδι παρόντος, ἀλλ᾽ ἐν Σκύθαις οὕτω μακρὰν ἀπόντος. Not much later, 
at the time of the regular meeting of the Amphictyonic Council (Aug. or Sept.), he 
had already returned, and he was then made general of the Amphictyons (Dem. Cor. 
152; Aesch. III. 129). 

8 Cor. 102—108 : see note on 103°. 


' vu, 7 


286 HISTORICAL SKETCH. [Spring of 


defeated in such land battles as had occurred, yet the Macedonians felt 
severely their naval weakness, by which they suffered a constant blockade 
of their coast without being able to retaliate by attacking Athens by 
sea’. It was obviously impossible for Philip to invade Attica by land 
without the codperation of both Thessaly and Thebes, and his relations 
with them did not warrant even a proposal to this end. Thessaly had 
been alienated by the abolition of her free governments and the establish- 
ment of a decadarchy and tetrarchies’; and Thebes, though she had 
gained the lion’s share of the spoils at the end of the Sacred War, was 
deeply offended by the loss of Nicaea in the pass of Thermopylae, which 
Philip gave to Thessaly, and of her own colony Echinus, which Philip 
had taken for himself*. Without the consent of Thessaly he could not 
command the pass of Thermopylae; and without Thebes he could not 
use the fertile plain of Boeotia for military operations and for the support 
of his army on his way to or from Attica. He needed therefore some 
device for securing the active aid_of both. Some undertaking which 
would unite the two in a common interest with himself seemed indis- 
pensable*. Such was Philip’s perplexity when he found himself again at 
war with Athens after six years of nominal peace. When he departed 
for Scythia (§ 69) this problem was still unsolved, though possibly he 
may already have confided to Aeschines directly or indirectly some 
practical hints for its solution. However this may have been, it so 
happened that before Philip’s return Aeschines had suddenly stirred up 
an Amphictyonic war, which delivered him from all his difficulties and 
opened the way for himself and his army into the very heart of Greece®. 
He had passed Thermopylae in triumph in 346 as the champion of the 


" 
Ϊ 
| 
ΐ 
; 
! 


God of Delphi; he was now to enter Greece a second time clothed with 


the same sacred authority, to aid the Amphictyonic Council in punishing 
new offenders who were openly defying their commands. 

71. We are here reduced to the alternative of believing either 
that Aeschines deliberately devised this Amphictyonic war in order to 
give Philip a free passage into Greece, or at least took advantage of 
a slight incident at Delphi to excite a general conflict, or else that he 
ignorantly and recklessly roused a war which could have no other end 


than bringing Philip into Greece at the head of an army. ‘The latter 
alternative is generally rejected ; and indeed it attributes to Aeschines - 


See Cor. 145, 146. 

See above 88 51, 60. 

See IX. 34 (w. Schol.); Aesch. 111. 140; Schaefer 11. 538, 539. 
Cor. 147. 

5 Cor. 149. 


1 
2 
3 
4 


330 B.C] AESCHINES AT DELPHI. 287 


a reckless ignorance of Greek politics with which we have no right to 
charge him. We are almost wholly dependent on his own graphic 
narrative for the facts as to the origin of this baneful war, and he must 


opinion, strongly confirms the view of Demosthenes, that Philip saw that 
his appointment as commander in an Amphictyonic war was the surest 
way in which he could march an army into Greece without the opposition 
of Thessaly or Thebes; that such a war would be useless to him if it 
were stirred up by any of his own delegates or friends ; and that he must 
employ an Athenian to devise a scheme which should secure this end 
without exciting suspicion in the Amphictyonic Council. At all events, 
perc aesewaS ready at Delphi to do him this very service. Ξ 

72. In the archonship of Theophrastus (340—339), the Athenian 
delegation to the spring meeting of the Amphictyonic Council consisted 
of Diognetus, the Hieromnemon of the year, and three Pylagori, Midias, 
the old enemy of Demosthenes, Thrasycles, and Aeschines?. These 
four were present at the meeting in Delphi, when Diognetus and Midias 
were attacked by fever and Aeschines suddenly found himself in a 
position of great importance. The Athenian delegates had been 
privately informed that the Locrians of Amphissa intended to propose a 
vote in the Council to fine Athens fifty talents because she had re-gilded 
_and affixed to the newly-built temple of Delphi* some shields, probably 


4 1 Aeschines tells how he stirred up the Amphictyons to war in 111. 107—124; and 
‘he slurs over the highly important matter of the appointment of Philip as commander 
in 128, 129, without expressly mentioning the appointment. Demosthenes, Cor. 
_ 149—152, alludes briefly to the Amphictyonic meeting at Delphi, being in essential 
agreement with Aeschines as to the main facts, and to Philip’s appointment ; in 163— 
179 and 211—218 he gives the subsequent events which led to the alliance of Athens 
and Thebes and those which followed that alliance. 

2 For the constitution of the Amphictyonic Council and the distinction of the 
two classes of delegates, Hieromnemons and Pylagori, see Essay V. Athens was 
_ represented as the most important member of the Ionic race. Among the inscriptions 
recently found at Delphi is a fragment, assigned to 341—340 B.C., containing the 
letters IQNQNAIOTN...NAIOY, obviously ᾿Ιώνων, Διογν[ἤτου ᾿Αθη]ναίου. Can this 
be the same Diognetus who was the Hieromnemon of Athens at Delphi in the spring 
of 339 B.c.? Bourguet, the editor, hesitates about the Delphic date. See Bull. de 
Corresp. Hellén. 1896, p. 238. 

8 See Aesch. II]. 116, ὅτι χρυσᾶς ἀσπίδας ἀνέθεμεν πρὸς τὸν καινὸν νεὼν πρὶν 
ἐξαρέσασθαι. This ‘‘new temple” was not the temple built by the Alcmaeonidae 
two centuries before, nor any addition to that building made after the Phocian War. 
‘The temple built by the Alcmaeonidae was destroyed early in the fourth century B.c. 
In 371 B.C., just before the battle of Leuctra, the Spartans were advised to ask for 
contributions for rebuilding the temple, περιαγγείλαντας ταῖς πόλεσι συμβαλέσθαι εἰς 


be condemned, if at all, on his own testimony’. And this evidence, in my - 


& ᾿ rt 
; ‘eye wes 


288 HISTORICAL SKETCH. . Speen 


elics of the battle of Plataea, and had renewed the old inscription, 
᾿Αθηναῖοι ἀπὸ Μήδων καὶ Θηβαίων, ὅτε τἀναντία τοῖς Ἕλλησιν ἐμάχοντο. 
This renewal of the ancient disgrace of Thebes in fighting on the side 
of the Persians at Plataea was, it must be confessed, neither a friendly 
nor a politic act of Athens; it shows the exasperation between Thebes 
and Athens which followed the victory of Leuctra. But this was of 
little consequence now. ‘The Hieromnemon sent for Aeschines, and 
asked him to attend the Amphictyonic meeting on that day in his place, 
as if he were a delegate with full powers, and defend Athens against the 
Locrian accusation. Aeschines was therefore present at the meeting by 
special authority. As he began to speak, apparently referring in some 
excitement to the threatened charge against’ Athens, he was rudely 
interrupted by an Amphissian, who protested against the very mention 
of the Athenians, declaring that they should be shut out of the temple as 
accursed because of their alliance with the Phocians. Aeschines replied 
in great anger; and among other retorts ‘“‘it occurred to him” to 
mention the impiety of the Amphissians in encroaching on the sacred 


τὸν ναὸν τοῦ ᾿Απόλλωνος ὁπόσον βούλοιτο ἑκάστη πόλις. See Xen. Hell. vi. 4, 2- 
In an Attic decree of 369—368 (C. I. Att. 11. no. 51), relating to the tyrant Dionysius, 
it was voted, περὶ μὲν τῶν γραμμάτων ὧν ἔπεμψεν Διονύσιος, τῆς οἰκοδομίας τοῦ νεὼ 
καὶ τῆς εἰρήνης τοὺς συμμάχους δόγμα εἰσενεγκεῖν εἰς τὸν δῆμον. See Kohler, Hermes 
XXVI. p. 45 (note), who refers to a Delphic inscription in the Mittheil. d. deutsch. 
Instit. (Athen), 1880, p. 203, relating to the restoration of the temple: Kohler thinks 
this inscription cannot be much later than the beginning of the 4th cent. B.c. In the 
Bulletin de Corresp. Hellén. for 1896, Homolle gives a history of the various temples 
of Delphi, based on the latest discoveries of the French: see pp. 677—7or, Le καινὸς 
νεώς (built in the fourth century B.c.).. He publishes the inscription above mentioned 
and discusses it at length. His conclusions are generally confirmatory of what was 
already known: (1) the old temple was destroyed about 373—372 B.C. by an earth- 
quake (not by fire, as had been assumed); (2) a general subscription was opened in 
371 for rebuilding the temple; (3) in 351—347 the building was erected as far as the 
epistyles (see below) ; (4) in 339 the new temple, not yet dedicated, was in a condition 
to receive the shields which the Athenians affixed to its architraves; (5) the temple 
was finished in 330—329. Two inscriptions are published in the same volume of the 
Bulletin: see 1. 28, 29, τριγλύφων δυώδεκα and ἐπιστυλίων ἕξ, on which Bourguet 
(p. 217) remarks, On sait que Védifice auquel étaient destinées ces piéces d’archi- — 
tecture est le temple lui-méme. Onze de ces triglyphes et cinq de ces épistyles 
étaient ceux de fronton Ouest; le douziéme triglyphe ‘et le sixiéme épistyle, ceux du 
retour d’angle S. O. 

The disputed expression (Aesch. 111. 116), ἀνέθεμεν πρὸς τὸν καινὸν νεὼν πρὶν 
ἐξαρέσασθαι (the reading now generally adopted), is referred by Kohler to some 
religious ceremony of dedication: see θῦσαι δὲ τῷ θεῷ ἀρεστήριον in C. I. Att. I. 
no. 403, 45, also Add. 4050, 16. For εἰσέφερον δόγμα (Aesch. ΗΙ. 116) and δίκην 
ἐπαγόντων (Dem. Cor. 1504) see note on the latter passage. 


330 B.c.] AMPHTSSIAN WAR. 289 


and accursed plains of Cirrha, which had been solemnly devoted to 
everlasting sterility and desolation by the Amphictyonic Council about 
250 years before, on the motion of Solon’, at the end of the first 
Sacred War. 

73. Cirrha was the ancient seaport of Delphi on the Gulf of Corinth, 
while Crissa (often confounded with it) was a town on the height above 
the river Pleistus, on the road to Delphi (near the modern Χρυσό)", 
The broad plain of Cirrha, one of the most fertile in Greece, lay between 
the foot of Parnassus and the coast, and was called by both names 
Cirrhaean and Crissaean. In obedience to the Amphictyonic curse, 
_ Cirrha with its harbour was destroyed, and the plain had remained un- 
cultivated until recently, when the Amphissians had re-established the 
_ ancient port as a convenient landing-place for visitors to Delphi, and 
_ levied tolls on those who used it. They had also cultivated a part of 
the accursed plain and erected buildings upon it. The Amphictyons 
seem to have quietly acquiesced in this violation of the sacred edict, 
᾿ doubtless seeing the advantage of the newly opened port to themselves 
_ and others, and thinking little of the almost forgotten curse. But they 

were not proof against the arts and eloquence of an accomplished 
_ Athenian orator, who ingeniously presented the case in impassioned 

language and with powerful appeals to the prejudices and the bigotry 
of an antiquated religious assembly, with which a venerable curse had 
greater weight than the strongest political motives or the abstract idea 
of Hellenic unity. From the hill near Delphi where the Amphictyonic 
Council sat under the open sky, there is a magnificent view of the sacred 
_ plain, extending to the gulf of Corinth. Here Aeschines stood in the 
excited assembly, and showed them the plantations and buildings of the 
Amphissians on the forbidden land; and he caused the terrific impre- 
cations of the ancient curse to be repeated, which declared any man, 
city, or state, which should cultivate or occupy the plain of Cirrha, 
accursed of: Apollo, Artemis, Leto, and Athena, and devoted to utter 
destruction with their houses and their race. He reminded them that 


= aig Me ley 


1 Aesch. I1I1. 115—118. The destruction of Cirrha and the consecration of its 
plain took place in 586 B.c., at the end of the ten years’ Sacred War. (See Clinton, 
Fasti Hellen.) 

2 The walls of Crissa, enclosing a large space on the brink of the cliff, are still to 
be seen, though buried and overgrown so as often to escape observation. They are 
an excellent example of the wall-building with which Thucydides (1. 93) contrasts the 
walls of Themistocles, consisting of two thin shells of stone, with rubble and clay 
between them. Apparent remains of the moles of the accursed harbour of Cirrha are 
also to be seen on the shore of the gulf. 


G. D. 19 


290 HISTORICAL SKETCH. [339 


the same curse was invoked on all who should permit others to violate 
the sacred edict. We cannot wonder that the whole assemblage was 
fired with fierce enthusiasm to avenge the wrongs of Apollo upon the 
sacrilegious Amphissians. When Aeschines had finished his speech, as 
he tells the court, the question of the Athenian shields was wholly 
forgotten, and the only thought was of the punishment of the Amphis- 
sians. The flame had now been kindled, which was to end in the 
conflagration that Philip was eager to see. An Amphictyonic war was 
begun, which could be ended only by the intervention of Philip and his 
army. Thebes and Thessaly could now be united in a common cause 
with Philip’. 

44. Late in the day the meeting adjourned; and a herald was ordered 
to proclaim that all Delphians, freemen and slaves, above the age of 
eighteen, should meet the next morning at daybreak with spades and 
picks, ready for serious work ; that all the Amphictyonic delegates (of 
both classes) should convene at the same place, ‘to aid the God and 
the sacred land”; and that any state which failed to obey should be 
accursed and excluded from the temple. This Amphictyonic mob 
assembled and descended to the plain, where they burned the houses 
and destroyed the moles which enclosed the harbour. On their way 
back to Delphi, they were attacked by a crowd from Amphissa, which 
lay about seven miles west of Delphi, and barely escaped with their 
lives: some of the Council were captured. The next day an Amphicty- 
onic Assembly (ἐκκλησία) was summoned, consisting of the delegates 
and all other citizens of Amphictyonic states who happened to be at 
Delphi. This body voted that the Hieromnemons, after consulting 
their respective states, should meet at Thermopylae at some time before ᾿ 
the regular autumnal meeting of the Council, prepared to take some 
definite action concerning the Amphissians*. When this vote was first 
reported at Athens by her delegates, the people “took the pious side” 
(as Aeschines calls it); but a few days later, after a little consideration 
and when the influence of Demosthenes had prevailed, it was voted that 
the Athenian delegates “should proceed to Thermopylae and Delphi at 
the times appointed by our ancestors,” and further that no Athenian 
delegates should take any part in the irregular meeting at Thermopylae, 
‘‘ either in speech or in action.” This wise step precluded Athens in the 
most public manner from taking any part in the mad Sacred War which | 


1 Aesch. 111. 119—122. 
2 This seems to be the meaning of the obscure words (Aesch. 124), ἔχοντας 
δόγμα (Ὁ) καθ᾽ & τι δίκας δώσουσιν οἱ ᾿Αμφισσεῖς. 


B.C] PHILIP AMPHICTYONIC GENERAL. 201 


Aeschines had stirred up : in his own words, “it forbids you to remember 
the oaths which your ancestors swore, or the curse, or the oracle of the 
God’.” 

75. The appointed meeting was held at Thermopylae, with πο. 
representatives from Athens, and (what was more ominous for Philip’s 
designs) with none from Thebes. It was voted to make war upon the 
_ Amphissians, and Cottyphus, the president of the Council, was made 
commander. ‘The Amphissians at first yielded, and were fined and 
ordered to banish the leading rebels. But they paid no fine, and soon 
restored their exiles, and banished again “the pious” whom the Am- 
phictyons had restored. ‘The regular autumnal meeting of the Council 
found things in this condition ; and it is hard to believe that the leaders 
in this miserable business expected any other issue. As Grote says of 
᾿ς Cottyphus, he ‘could not do anything—probably did not wish to do 
᾿ς anything—without the intervention of Philip.” The Council was told 
plainly and with truth, that they must either raise a mercenary army and 
levy a tax on their states to pay for it, fining all who refused to do their 
part, or else make Philip the Amphictyonic general. It is not surprising 
that Philip was at once elected*. We are now just beyond the point at 
which Aeschines thought it wise to stop in his exciting narrative. When 
he told of the first expedition against Amphissa under the command of 
Cottyphus, he added that Philip was then “away off in Scythia,” so that 
of course he was in nobody’s mind. After this, he could not talk of 
Philip’s election a few weeks later without an absurd anti-climax, which 
~ would be all the more ridiculous when he was compelled to add that the 
"first act of the new Amphictyonic general in this pious war was one of 
open hostility to Athens and Thebes. Accordingly he does not mention 
in this narrative either the appointment of Philip or the seizure of 
_ Elatea which immediately followed his appointment. Instead of stating 
these important facts, the direct results of his own deliberate action, he 
bursts forth with a new flood of eloquence and dilates on the terrible 
omens and the more terrible calamities which followed the refusal of 
Athens to take the leadership in the holy war against Amphissa, to which 
she was divinely called by the voice of Heaven; and he once alludes to 
_ Elatea in the vaguest manner, without hinting that its seizure by Philip 
‘was an event for which he was himself even in the slightest degree 
responsible’. 

1 Aesch. Ill. 122—127. 
2 Dem. Cor. 152: see the whole description 149—153. 


® See the end of 129, with its mysterious and obscure language, and the preceding 
Narrative. For the allusion to Elatea see 140. 


I9g—2 


292 HISTORICAL SKETCH. [339- 


76. Demosthenes, as we have seen, describes the action of Aeschines 
in stirring up the new Sacred War very briefly, representing it as a 
deliberate plot, devised by Philip and executed by Aeschines, for securing 
Philip and his army free admission into Greece to attack Athens. He 
mentions the choice of Philip as general after the failure of the first 
campaign against Amphissa, and adds that Philip immediately collected 
an army and entered Greece, professedly bound for the plain of Cirrha ; 
but that he suddenly bade the Cirrhaeans and Locrians a long farewell, 
and seized and fortified Elatea. This old Phocian town, which had 
been dismantled in 346 B.c., held a military position of the greatest 
importance for Philip’s plans. It stood at the outlet of one of the chief 
passes leading from Thermopylae, and it commanded the broad plain 
through which the Cephisus flows on its way to Boeotia. It was also 
the key to the rough roads leading westward to Doris and Amphissa. 
From this point Philip threatened both Athens and Thebes so directly 
as to leave no doubt of his purpose in entering Greece. He hoped that 
the traditional feud between Athens and Thebes would bring Thebes 
into his alliance; but he trusted to his commanding position on the 
frontier of Boeotia to convince her that her only hope of safety lay in 
his friendship. The prospect of Boeotia being the seat of war was an 
alarming one, from which a united invasion of Attica by Thebes and 
Philip was the only sure escape’. Demosthenes states that the Mace- 
donian party in both Athens and Thebes had long been fomenting 
discord between the two cities, which were now so estranged that Philip 
felt that there was no possibility of their uniting against him. The 
public documents quoted as proof of this enmity are unfortunately 
lost’. 

At the same time with his seizure of Elatea (in the late autumn 
of 339) Philip took possession of Cytinium, one of the towns of the 
ancient Dorian Tetrapolis near Parnassus’®. 

+7. We are almost wholly dependent on Demosthenes for what we 
know of the skilful diplomacy by which Thebes was secured as an ally 
of Athens against Philip*; This was the crowning achievement of the 
political life of Demosthenes, and he always alludes to it with honest — 
pride. We have his own graphic story of the wild excitement at Athens” 


1 Dem. Cor. 213. 

2 Ibid. 163—168. 

ὃ See Philoch. frag. 135, under Λυσιμαχίδης (archon 339—338): ἐπὶ τούτου... 
Φιλίππου καταλαβόντος ᾿Ελάτειαν καὶ Κυτίνιον καὶ πρέσβεις πέμψαντος els Θήβας. For 
the Dorian Tetrapolis see Grote II. 387, 388. 

4 See Dem. Cor. 169—188, 211—216. 


338 B.c.] ALLIANCE OF ATHENS AND THEBES. 293 


when a messenger at evening brought the news from Elatea, and of the 
solemn meeting of the people the next morning when he made his 
_ speech, full of dignified eloquence, by which he laid the foundation for 
a right understanding with Thebes and secured the appointment of a 
friendly embassy, of which he was himself the leader. He then de- 
scribes briefly but clearly the critical negotiations with Thebes, which 
᾿ς ended in a treaty of alliance. We are not informed of the details of 
this treaty; but the carping criticisms of Aeschines indicate that the 
_ liberal spirit towards Thebes which inspired Demosthenes in his first 
_ proposals was felt in all the negotiations. Aeschines gives one important 
_ item, designed to protect the alliance against the defection of any 
_ Boeotian cities to Philip. This provided that in case of any such defec- 
_ tion “Athens would stand by the Boeotians at ‘Thebes!.” Demosthenes 
brings forward a letter addressed by Philip to his former friends in Pelo- 
᾿ς ponnesus when the Thebans deserted him, in which he solicits their help 
_ on the ground that he is waging an Amphictyonic war in a holy cause?. 
During the campaign which followed, Demosthenes appears to have 
_ had equal influence at Athens and at Thebes. Theopompus says that 
_ the generals at Athens and the Boeotarchs at Thebes were equally 
obedient to his commands, and that the public assembly of Thebes was 
᾿ς ruled by him as absolutely as that of Athens’. 

78. Of the campaign itself very little is known. We hear of one 
_ “winter battle” and one “battle by the river,” in which the allies were 
victorious*. These victories were celebrated by festivals and thanks- 
givings ; and they caused Philip to renew his solicitations for help in 
letters to the Peloponnesians®. The alliance with Thebes was so 
popular in Athens, that Demosthenes, as its author, was publicly crowned 
at the Great Dionysia in the spring of 338%. The allies suffered one 
‘serious defeat near Amphissa, which Philip—perhaps for the sake of 


1 Aesch, 111. 142. 

2 Dem. Cor. 156, 158. 

3 Theopomp. fr. 239: see Plut. Dem. 18: ὑπηρετεῖν δὲ μὴ μόνον τοὺς στρατηγοὺς 
τῷ Δημοσθένει ποιοῦντας τὸ προσταττόμενον ἀλλὰ Kal τοὺς βοιωτάρχας, διοικεῖσθαι δὲ 


is ἐκκλησίας ἁπάσας οὐδὲν ἧττον ὑπ᾽ ἐκείνου τότε τὰς Θηβαίων ἢ τὰς ᾿Αθηναίων. 
Theopompus adds ἀδίκως and παρ᾽ ἀξίαν, which Plutarch corrects to καὶ πάνυ προσ- 
᾿ἠκόντως. This is a continuation of the passage quoted in ὃ 78, n. 4, p. 294. 

4 Dem. Cor. 216, 217. See inscriptions in which Athenians are honoured for 
bravery in battles in this year, C. I. Att. 11. no. 562, with K@hler’s remarks. See 
‘Schaefer 11. 556. 

> Dem. Cor. 218, 222. 


§ Ibid. 222, 223. 


294 HISTORICAL SKELCR [ Aug. or Sept. 


appearances—finally attacked. By a cunning stratagem, Philip caused 
the Greeks to withdraw from the passes leading to Amphissa, while he 
marched through them and destroyed the allied army which met him on 
the other side. This consisted of a Theban force under Proxenus, and 
10,000 mercenaries under Chares whom Athens had sent to protect 
Amphissa. Philip attacked these two forces separately and destroyed 
_them easily’. He then took Amphissa and destroyed it*. He also 
captured Naupactus, put to death the Achaean garrison with its com- Ὁ 
mander Pausanias, and gave the town to the Aetolians, thus fulfilling 
a promise which he had made four years before®. At some time during 
this campaign, perhaps after his victory at Amphissa, he sent a herald 
with proposals of peace to Thebes and Athens, which, it appears, 
the Boeotarcls were at first inclined to entertain. Even at Athens a 
peace-party appeared, with Phocion as its advocate’, Aeschines relates 
that Demosthenes was so disturbed by the peace-movement at Thebes, 
that he threatened to propose a bill to send an embassy to Thebes to 
ask for the Athenian army a free passage through Boeotia to attack 
Philip’. We hear no more of this movement, and a visit of Demosthenes 
to Thebes probably brought it to an end. 

79. Our accounts of the battle of Chaeronea are as meagre as 
those of the preceding campaign. We depend chiefly on Diodorus, 
who devotes the greater part of his short account to the exploits of the 
young Alexander, then eighteen years old, to whom his father gave the 
command of one wing, “supported by his most distinguished generals®.” 
This decisive battle was fought on the seventh of Metageitnion, the 


1 Polyaen. Iv. 2, 8. : 

2 Ibid. (end); Strab. 427, κατέσπασαν δ᾽ αὐτὴν οἱ ᾿Αμφικτύονες. See Aesch. 
HI, 149; 

> See Schaefer 11. 559, with ἢ. 2. He thus restores (from Suid., φρουρήσεις ἐν 
Ναυπάκτῳ, and Zenobius, Paroem. Gr. VI. 33) Theopomp. frag. 46: Φίλιππος ἑλὼν 
Ναύπακτον ᾿Αχαιῶν τοὺς φρουροὺς ἀπέσφαξε καὶ Ilavoaviay τὸν ἄρχοντα τῆς φρουρᾶς 
ἀπέκτεινεν. (See Jahrb. d. Philol. 1859, p. 483.) Strab. 427, ἔστι δὲ νῦν Αἰτωλῶν 
(Ναύπακτος) Φιλίππου προσκρίναντος. Dem. ΙΧ. 34, οὐκ ᾿Αχαιῶν Ναύπακτον ὀμώμοκεν 
Αἰτωλοῖς παραδώσειν ; See 8 59, Ρ- 275, ne 4 (above). 


4 Plut. Phoc. 16; Schaefer 11. 559, 560. Phocion is probably the general against — : 


whom Demosthenes made his famous threat (Aesch. 146), εἰ δέ τις αὐτῷ τῶν στρατηγῶν 
ἀντείποι,...διαδικασίαν ἔφη γράψειν τῷ βήματι πρὸς τὸ στρατήγιον. See Plut. Dem. 18 
(Theopomp.): οὕτω δὲ μέγα καὶ λαμπρὸν ἐφάνη τὸ τοῦ ῥήτορος ἔργον ὥστε τὸν μὲν ; 
Φίλιππον εὐθὺς ἐπικηρυκεύεσθαι δεόμενον εἰρήνης, ὀρθὴν δὲ τὴν Ἑλλάδα γενέσθαι καὶ 
συνεξαναστῆναι πρὸς τὸ μέλλον. See ὃ 77, n. 3, Ρ- 2093. 

5 Aesch. Π1. 148—151. 

6 Diod. xvI. 86. 


- 338 Bc] BATTLE OF CHAERONEA. 295 


second month of the Attic year’. By a stratagem Philip had drawn the 
_ Greek army from its advantageous position in the hills into the plain 
_ of Chaeronea, where he could use his cavalry with the best effect. At 
_ first the battle was rather favourable to the allies; but soon the superior 
discipline of the Macedonians prevailed, and the Greeks were driven | 
back on both wings. A general flight ensued, after which the Greeks 
were scattered, so that there was no longer any military force between 
Philip’s camp and Thebes or Athens. These cities lay at his mercy; their 
armies were disbanded, and neither could help the other. A thousand 
Athenians were killed, and about two thousand were taken prisoners. 
_ The Boeotian loss was also great, and the famous Sacred Band of three 
hundred Thebans perished to a man’. Diodorus states that Philip’s 
army consisted of 30,000 foot and not less than 2,000 horse, adding 
that Philip had the advantage in numbers and strategy, but that the 
two armies were equally matched in courage and spirit. Justin, on the 
contrary, states that the Greeks far exceeded the enemy in numbers’. 
The general results, the utter annihilation of the Greek army, the 
breaking-up of the Hellenic confederation which Demosthenes had 
brought together against Philip, and the decisive establishment of Mace- 
donian supremacy over the whole of Greece, are beyond question. 

80. The panic and despair in Athens when the first tidings of 
the defeat arrived were most pitiable. No one knew how soon the 
victorious army might follow in the steps of the messengers who brought 
the terrible news*. But the leaders of the people who were at home, 
especially Lycurgus and Hyperides, and Demosthenes after his return 
from the battlefield, did all that was possible to restore courage, and the 
panic soon gave way to a resolute determination to save the city from 
_ destruction or capture. Hyperides, who was one of the Senate of Five 
Hundred (regularly exempt from military service), immediately proposed 
a bill ordering the Senate to go to the Piraeus under arms and there 
to hold a meeting to provide for the safety of the port ; and further pro- 


! According to Boeckh, Mondcyclen, p. 29, the Attic year 338—-337 (Ol. 110, 3) 
_ began July 27, the preceding year being a leap year of 384 days. This would make 
the seventh of Metageitnion our first of September. Boeckh afterwards expressed 
doubts as to the beginning of 338—337, thinking it possible that 339—338 had only 
_ 354 days: this would make the battle fall on our second of August. See Schaefer 1. 
_ 561, 562 (note); and Curtius, Griech. Gesch., Book VII. note 96. 

2 For the ἱερὸς λόχος and their fate see Plut. Pelop. 18. 

* Justin IX. 3: cum Athenienses longe maiore militum numero praestarent, assiduis 
bellis indurata virtute Macedonum vincuntur. 

4 See Lycurg. Leoc. 39, 40. 


296 HISTORICAL SKETCH. [338- 


viding that all slaves in the mines and the country districts who would 
enlist should be free, and that exiles should be recalled, public debtors 
and other ἄτιμοι should be restored to their rights, and metics should 
be made citizens, on the same condition. It was hoped that these last 
measures might furnish a force of 150,000 men for immediate defence’. 
It was also voted to bring the women and children and such sacred 
property as was movable from unprotected places into the Piraeus’. 
Lycurgus, who had charge of the finances, did wonders in replenishing 
the empty treasury, and in providing arms and ships for the emergency’. 
Large sums of money were raised by private contributions, the μεγάλαι 
ἐπιδόσεις Of Cor. ὃ 171, Demosthenes giving one talent. Demosthenes 
devoted himself especially to preparing the city for immediate defence, 
especially by repairing the dilapidated walls and other defences and by 
raising money for this object’. In adopting all these energetic measures 
the people showed that the spirit of Marathon and: Salamis was not 
wholly extinct at Athens’. 

81. When Philip heard of these preparations for receiving him, he © 
naturally thought seriously of his next steps. He seems to have felt no 
doubt about the treatment of Thebes. As a former ally, who had 
deliberately turned against him at a critical moment, she could expect 
only severe punishment. Accordingly, he compelled her to ransom her 
prisoners and even to pay for the right to bury her dead at Chaeronea®; 
he broke up the Boeotian confederacy and made all the other towns 
independent of Thebes; he placed a Macedonian garrison in the 
Cadmea ; and he recalled the exiles who were opposed to the Athe- 
nian alliance, and-established from these a judicial council of three 
hundred. Some of the old leaders were exiled, and others put to death ; 
and their estates were confiscated’. Philip’s knowledge of the position 


* Lycurg. Leoc. 37, 41; Hyper. fr. 29 (Bl.). When Hyperides was indicted by 
γραφὴ παρανόμων for the illegality of some of these measures, he replied: ἐπεσκότει 
μοι τὰ Μακεδόνων ὅπλα" οὐκ ἐγὼ τὸ ψήφισμα ἔγραψα, ἡ δ᾽ ἐν Χαιρωνείᾳ μάχη. 

? See Vit. X. Orat. 849 A for this, and for the quotation in the preceding note. 

3 Ibid. 852 C; Paus. 1. 29, 16. 

* See Cor. 248!” and note; Lycurg. Leoc. 44. Aeschines, II. 236, casts a slur 
upon the patriotic fervour with which this work was done: οὐ γὰρ περιχαρακώσαντα 
χρὴ τὰ τείχη οὐδὲ τάφους δημοσίους ἀνελόντα τὸν ὀρθῶς πεπολιτευμένον δωρεὰς 
αἰτεῖν. 

ὅ On the behaviour of Athens after Chaeronea see, in general, Schaefer 111. 4—16, 
with the references, 

δ Justin 1x. 4°: Thebanorum porro non modo captivos verum etiam interfectorum 
sepulturam vendidit. 

7 Diod. Xvi. 87; Paus. 1x. 1, 8; Justin 1x. 4. 


PEACE OF DEMADES. 297 


337 B.C. | 


of Athens in Greece probably convinced him that it would be the worst 
possible policy for him to treat her in this way. After the active 
measures taken by the Athenians their city could not be taken without 
a siege, which might be protracted into the winter; and such treatment 
would unite Athens against him in hopeless enmity. He fortunately | 
had a good, though unprincipled, adviser at hand, the Athenian 
Demades. He was taken prisoner at Chaeronea, but had ingratiated 
himself with Philip by his manners and his good advice, so that he was 
released and remained as a friend in the king’s camp. He had doubtless 
confirmed Philip’s opinion about the best policy to be pursued with 
Athens, by reminding him of the large and influential Macedonian party 
there, which was then out of favour but might be restored to influence 
by gentle treatment and friendly words at the present crisis. Philip 
accordingly sent him as a messenger to Athens'. He must have sent 
assurances of his friendly disposition and of his willingness to grant 
her any reasonable requests;..and the Athenians replied by sending 
Demades, Aeschines, and probably Phocion as envoys to Philip, to ask 
for a release of the Athenian captives’. Philip received this embassy 
with great cordiality and immediately invited them to his table*. He 
released all the prisoners without ransom, and promised to return the 
ashes of those who had fallen. He sent these remains to Athens in 
charge of no less a person than Antipater, with whom Alexander him- 
self went as a special messenger with offers of peace and friendship‘. 
_ The result was the treaty of peace, known as the Peace of Demades, by 
which both peace and alliance were again established between Philip 
and Athens. The Athenians were to remain free and independent, and 
Philip probably agreed never to send ships of war into the Piraeus’. 


τἄμ» 


4 


1 Diod. xvi. 87, where the reproach of Demades to the drunken Philip im- 

mediately after the battle is given: βασιλεῦ, τῆς τύχης σοι περιθείσης πρόσωπον 
᾿Αγαμέμνονος, αὐτὸς οὐκ αἰσχύνῃ πράττων ἔργα Θερσίτου; 

᾿ς 5 Suid. under Δημάδης (3); Aesch. 111. 227; Dem. Cor. 282, 284. For Phocion 
see Schaefer 111. 25, n. 1. 

3 See note on Cor. 2874, with the references. 

4 See Polyb. v. to: χωρὶς λύτρων ἀποστείλας τοὺς αἰχμαλώτους καὶ κηδεύσας 

᾿᾽Αθηναίων τοὺς τετελευτηκότας, ἔτι δὲ συνθεὶς ᾿Αντιπάτρῳ τὰ τούτων ὀστᾶ καὶ τῶν ἀπαλ- 

᾿λαττομένων τοὺς πλείστους ἀμφιέσας, κιτ.λ. Justin rx. 4°: super haec Alexandrum filium 

cum amico Antipatro, qui pacem cum his amicitiamque iungeret. Diod. Xv1. 87. 

® Paus. VII. 10, 5: ᾿Αθηναῖοι yap μετὰ τὸ ἀτύχημα TO ἐν Βοιωτοῖς οὐκ ἐγένοντο 

Φιλίππου κατήκοοι. That Philip must have bound himself neither to enter Attica with 

an army nor the Piraeus with warships, Schaefer, 111. 27, 28, argues from [Dem.] XVII. 

26, 28, τὸ δὲ ὑβριστικώτατον...τῶν Μακεδόνων. ..τὸ τολμῆσαι εἰσπλεῦσαι εἰς τὸν Πειραιᾷ 

παρὰ τὰς κοινὰς ἡμῖν πρὸς αὐτοὺς συνθήκας. But this has no reference to the land. 


, 


298 HISTORICAL SKETCH. [337- 


Oropus, which had been taken from Thebes, was now at length restored 
to Athens’. This settlement of an ancient dispute, though it was in 
favour of Athens, must have been an unwelcome concession at this 
moment, especially to those who had recently welcomed Thebes as a 
friend and ally. Athens was to hold certain islands, among which were 
Salamis, Samos, and Delos’; but all trace of her recent alliance and 
all thought of maritime empire had disappeared for ever®. Philip 
left it open to her to join the general Greek League which he 
proposed to form, and of which he was to be the head. This step 
would sacrifice the independence of Athens in many points, and we 
do not know what arguments were used to induce her to become a 
member. But in the absence of Demosthenes, and in spite of 
scruples of Phocion, who asked for more time to consider the 
question, the Assembly adopted the proposals of Demades in full, 
and these made Athens a member of the League’. ΒΥ this step, 
which was probably a necessary one under the circumstances, Athens 
ceased to have any independent political existence; and the peace 
of Demades ends her history as a free state and as a power in the 
Hellenic world. 

82. The feeling of Demosthenes about this peace after eight years’ 
experience is seen in Cor. ὃ 89. While he doubtless acquiesced quietly 
in it at the beginning’, he never forgot the bitter humiliation. Under 
the influence of this quiet submission to Philip’s authority, cloaked 
under the name of independence, the Macedonian party, with Aeschines 


1 See Schol. to Dem. Cor. 99 (p. 259, 10). Demades frag. 1. 9 (Didot): ἔγραψα 
καὶ Φιλίππῳ τιμάς" οὐκ ἀρνοῦμαι. δισχιλίους yap αἰχμαλώτους ἄνευ λύτρων καὶ χίλια 
πολιτῶν σώματα χωρὶς κήρυκος καὶ τὸν ᾿Ωρωπὸν ἄνευ πρεσβείας λαβὼν ὑμῖν ταῦτ᾽ 
ἔγραψα. This seems to imply that Philip included the transfer of Oropus in his 
original message sent by Demades (see Schaefer 111. 27). } 

2 For the islands left to Athens see Schaefer III. 28, ἢ. I. 

3 Paus. 1. 25, 3: τὸ yap ἀτύχημα τὸ ἐν Χαιρωνείᾳ ἅπασι τοῖς “Ελλησιν ἦρξε κακοῦ"... 
᾿Αθηναίοις δὲ λόγῳ συνθέμενος (sc. Φίλιππος) ἔργῳ σφᾶς μάλιστα ἐκάκωσε, νήσους τε 
ἀφελόμενος καὶ τῆς ἐς τὰ ναυτικὰ παύσας ἀρχῆς. Of course Athens now lost her control 
of the Hellespont, with the Chersonese and Byzantium. 

4 Plut. Phoc. 16: ὁ δὲ (sc. Φωκίων) τὴν μὲν ἄλλην τοῦ Φιλίππου πολιτείαν καὶ 
φιλανθρωπείαν ᾧετο δεῖν προσδέχεσθαι: Δημάδου δὲ γράψαντος ὅπως 7 πόλις μετέχοι 
τῆς κοινῆς εἰρήνης καὶ τοῦ συνεδρίου τοῖς “ENAnow, οὐκ εἴα πρὸ τοῦ γνῶναι τίνα Φίλιππος ; 
αὑτῷ γενέσθαι παρὰ τῶν Ἑλλήνων ἀξιώσει. See [Dem.] XVII. 30: προσγέγραπται ταῖς 
συνθήκαις, ἐὰν βουλώμεθα τῆς. κοινῆς εἰρήνης μετέχειν, which Schaefer (III. 29, n. 3) 
refers to this question: cf. Suidas, Demades (3) ἔγραψε δὲ καὶ ψήφισμα τῷ Φιλίππῳ 
τοὺς “Ελληνας ὑπακούειν. 

5 Demosthenes, Cor. 231, refers to the good fortune of Athens in escaping the — 
fate of Thebes. > | 

; 


i 


330 B.C.] PEACE OF DEMADES. 299 


at its head, again became powerful at Athens’. It was then that it was 
safe for the whole herd of the enemies of Demosthenes to persecute him 
with every form of process which was known to the Attic law, when 
(as he says) he was “brought to trial every day.” But he mentions 
this only to testify to the affection of his fellow citizens, who always 
acquitted him in the popular courts, and thus justified his conduct in the 
most effective manner®. Indeed, though the party of Aeschines then 
had the courage to speak its sentiments more freely than ever before’, 
_and in so doing gained the favour of Philip and his partizans, the sober 
sense of the people always recognized the services of men like Demos- 
thenes in better times and expressed itself whenever an occasion offered. 
There was no testimony of the public esteem and affection which De- 
mosthenes valued more highly than the choice of the people in making 
him their orator to deliver the eulogy on the heroes of Chaeronea*: Here 
the genuine feeling of patriotic gratitude to the man who had fought the 
battle of Grecian liberty almost single-handed impelled the citizens to 
reject all candidates who were in sympathy with Philip or his cause, 
including Aeschines and even Demades, and to choose the man who was 
most heartily identified with the lost cause for which these heroes had 
died. And the same public respect for Demosthenes and for his honest 
and unswerving devotion to what was now seen more clearly than ever 
to have been the cause of Grecian liberty, the cause which had made 
_ their ancestors glorious, was shown in the overwhelming vote by which 
the popular court acquitted Ctesiphon and condemned Aeschines, at the 
_yery moment when such a judgment might have been deemed a public 
defiance of Alexander’s authority, when the whole Greek world was 
ringing with the news of the victory of Arbela. 


1 Dem. Cor. 320. 2 Ibid. 248—250. 
Ὁ Ibid. 286°. 4 Ibid. 285. 


300 
BG. 
384—383. 
382—381. 
379—378. 
378—377. 
376—375- 
371—370. 
366—365. 
364—363. 
362—361. 
[559--.358. 
358—357- 
[35 7—356. 


HISTORICAL SKETCH. 


TABLE* ΘΕΌ ΣΙ ΑΙ ΟΝ 


Birth of Demosthenes and (probably) Aristotle (§ 8)". 

Birth of Philip of Macedon (ὃ 3). 

Spartan garrison expelled from Theban Cadmea. 

Formation of new maritime confederacy of Athens. 

Financial reforms of Nausinicus. Introduction of sym- 
mories for the property tax. 

Death of Demosthenes, father of the orator. 
appointed for the son. (ὃ 8.) 

Battle of Naxos (Sept. 376). 

Battle of Leuctra (July 371). 

Demosthenes comes of age at 18: devotes two years to 
preparation for the lawsuit against his guardians, under 
legal advice of Isaeus (§ 8). 

Trial of suit against Aphobus (δὲ 9, 10). 

Battle of Mantinea and death of Epaminondas (§ 1). 

Suit of Demosthenes against Onetor (§ 10). 

Accession of Philip of Macedon (§ 3). 

Artaxerxes III. (Ochus) becomes king of Persia. 

Establishment of symmories for the trierarchy by law of 
Periander. 

Athenian expedition to Euboea and freedom of the island 
from the Thebans (§ 2). Outbreak of Social War 
(autumn of 357) (δ 2). Philip captures Amphipolis, 
which leads to war with Athens (ὃ 3). He takes Pydna 
and Potidaea from Athens, gives Potidaea to Olynthus, 
and founds Philippi (§ 3). 


Guardians 


[556--3 55--——Birth of Alexander the Great, July 21, 356 (ὃ 3). 


chsh 994: 


Beginning of Sacred (Phocian) War: seizure of temple of 

~ Delphi by Philomelus (4, $)——— 

End of Social War, spring of 355 (δ 2). 

Speeches of Demosthenes against Androtion and against 
Leptines (ὃ 11). 


' The references in ( ) are made to sections of the Historical Sketch. 


SS ee 
2 4 


TABLE OF DATES. .- | 301 


354-353. Eubulus takes direction of finances of Athens. 
‘Speech of Demosthenes on the Symmories (δ 11). 

| Philomelus killed. Sacred War continued by Onomarchus. 

| Spoliation of temple of Delphi. (ὃ 5.) 

353—352- Philip takes Methone from Athens (§ 3). 

1 He attacks and defeats Lycophron of Pherae; has battles 

| with Phayllus and Onomarchus, and finally defeats 

ba Onomarchus, who is slain. Philip secures control of 

“-Ὀ Gulf of Pagasae. (ὃ 6.) 

) Speeches of Demosthenes against Timocrates and for the 

Megalopolitans (§ 11). 

| : Athens sends force to Thermopylae and closes the pass 

| | το Philip, befo before midsummer 352 (§ 7). 

| 352—351. Philip besieges Heraion Teichos in Thrace, Nov. 352 (ὃ 12). 

First Philippic of Demosthenes, spring of 351 (δ 12). 
351—350. Speech of Demosthenes for the Rhodians (δ 13). 
Athens sends Phocion with an army to help Plutarchus 
in Euboea (Feb. 350). Battle of Tamynae (March). 
(§ 14.) 
Midias assaults Demosthenes at the Great Dionysia (March 
350), and is condemned by vote of the Assembly (§ 15). 

— 349—348. Demosthenes Senator (Schaefer 11. 116). He writes speech 

| against Midias, not delivered (§ 15). 

Philip attacks the Olynthian confederation and besieges 
Olynthus. Alliance of Olynthus with Athens (§ 16). 
Demosthenes delivers his three Olynthiacs (δ 17). Philip 
sends peaceful messages to Athens and releases Phrynon 

3 ( 18), 

{348—347. Philocrates proposes negotiations for peace with Philip, is 

Γ indicted therefor and acquitted (ὃ 18). 

Olynthus captured | ‘by Philip, with all its confederate towns 
(early autumn of 348): consternation throughout Greece 
(δὲ τό, 19). 

Mission of Aristodemus to Philip (ὃ 19). 

Movement of Eubulus and Aeschines against Philip, and 

embassies to Greek states (S§ 20, 21). 

347—346'. Themistocles Archon at Athens. Demosthenes again 

< Senator (S§ 19, 38). 


1 For the division of months in 347—346 B.Cc., and the dates according to our 
Calendar, see pp. 306, 307. 


302 
347—340. 
346---345. 


HISTORICAL SKETCH. 


Aristodemus returns with friendly messages from Fhilip, 
and is crowned on motion of Demosthenes (§ 19). 

Thebans and Phocians both exhausted by Sacred War. 
Phocians ask aid from Athens (early in 346), but reject 
it when sent. (§§ 23, 24.) 

On motion of Philocrates (Feb. 346), ten envoys are sent 
to Philip to propose negotiations for peace (First 
Embassy). Envoys return end of March. (δὲ 25—28.) 

Two meetings of Assembly, to discuss terms of peace with 
Philip’s envoys, 18th and 19th of Elaphebolion (April 
15, 16), 346: peace formally voted on second day. 
(ὃ 29—37:) “Ὁ 

Same envoys sent again to Philip, to ratify the peace 

᾿ς (Second Embassy) (δ 38). 

Meeting of Assembly on 25th of Elaphebolion (April 22), 
Demosthenes presiding (§ 38). 

Address of Isocrates to Philip (Φίλιππος). 

Decree of Senate ordering the departure of the Embassy, 
3rd of Munychion (April 29) (§ 39). 

Return of Embassy to Athens, 13th of Scirophorion (July 7). 
Reports to Senate and Assembly. Philip already at 
Thermopylae. Assembly votes (16th of Scir., July 10) 
to compel the Phocians to deliver the temple of Delphi 
to “the Amphictyons.” (δὲ 43—45.) 

Ten envoys (Third Embassy) sent by Athens to Thermo- 
pylae, to report the action of the Assembly to Philip: 
they depart about the 21st of Scirophorion (July 15). 
(δὲ 45, 47.) 

Phalaecus surrenders Thermopylae to Philip 23rd of Sciroph. 
(July 17). The Athenian envoys hear this news at 
Chalcis and return. Meeting of Assembly in Piraeus 


(27th of Scir., July 21). Embassy ordered to proceed © 


to Thermopylae, and departs at once. (δὲ 46—48.) 
End of Sacred War. 


Demosthenes and Timarchus begin proceedings against — 


Aeschines for παραπρεσβεία. 


Archias Archon. Philip summons Amphictyonic Council, | 


which expels the Phocians and gives their two votes to 
Philip. ‘Terrible punishment of the Phocians. (8 48.) 


Philip celebrates the Pythian games (Sept. 346). Am- 


ΒΞ σὴν ον». 


341—340. 


.346---345. 


345--344. 


.344--343. 


 343--.342. 


342—341. 


ὌΨΙ OF VDATES. | 303 


phictyonic deputation sent to Athens to demand 
recognition of Philip’s position in the Council. Speech 
of Demosthenes on the Peace. (δὲ 49, 50.) 

Prosecution (by ἐπαγγελία δοκιμασίας) of Timarchus by 
Aeschines (winter). See Essay IV. § 2. 

Philip establishes a decadarchy in Thessaly. He inter- 
feres in disputes in Peloponnesus: Demosthenes sent as 
envoy to counteract his influence. (8 51.) 

Second Philippic of Demosthenes (late in 344). Con- 
tinued influence of Philip in Peloponnesus: attack on 
Megara. (§ 52.) 

Trial and condemnation of Antiphon (§ 53). 

Prosecution of Philocrates on εἰσαγγελία by Hyperides and 
his exile (before midsummer 343). See Essay IV. ὃ 4. 
Case of temple of Delos before Amphictyonic Council: 

Hyperides advocate of Athens (ἢ 54). 

Mission of Python to Athens (before midsummer 343). 
Discussion of the peace and of the claim of Athens to 
Halonnesus. (ὃ 55.) 

Philip’s intrigues in Euboea: he supports tyrants at 
Eretria and Oreus. Chalcis, under lead of Callias and 
Taurosthenes, friendly to Athens. (§ 58.) 

Trial and acquittal of Aeschines on charge of παραπρεσβεία 
(late summer of 343). See Essay IV. 

Philip invades Epirus (winter), and threatens Ambracia 
and Acarnania. On his return he establishes tetrarchs 
in Thessaly. (δὲ 59, 60.) 

Philip’s letter to Athens about Halonnesus and modi- 
fications of the peace. Speech of Hegesippus on Halon- 
nesus (Dem. vii.). (δὲ 56, 57.) 

Aristotle made tutor of Alexander (§ 60). 

Philip extends his power in the Thracian Chersonese, and 
comes into conflict with the Athenian general, Diopithes. 
Speech on the Chersonese and Third Philippic of Demos- 
thenes (before midsummer 341). (δὲ 61, 62.) 


‘Mission of Demosthenes to Byzantium (summer): alliance 


of Athens and Byzantium. Embassies to Persia, Rhodes, 
and Peloponnesus. (ὃ 63.) 

Expeditions of Athens to Euboea, which overthrow tyrants 
in Oreus and (later) in Eretria (§ 64). 


pide ta 9 


304 HISTORICAL SKETCH. 


341—340. Anaxinus of Oreus executed as a spy at Athens (§ 65). 

League against Philip formed by Demosthenes and 
Callias of Chalcis (S§ 63, 64). 

Demosthenes crowned at the Great Dionysia for his 
success in liberating Euboea (§ 64). 

The people of Peparethus seize Halonnesus and make the 
Macedonian garrison prisoners. Philip in return ravages 
Peparethus. (ὃ 66.) (Date ?) 

340—339. Theophrastus Archon. Philip besieges Perinthus by land 
and sea (late summer of 340): in the autumn he raises 
this siege and attacks Byzantium. (§67.) He writes to 
the Athenians (before the attack on Byzantium), and 
makes an open declaration of war, which Athens at 
once accepts (§ 68). Two fleets sent by Athens to 
relieve Byzantium: siege raised by Philip (δ 67). Athe- 
nian merchant ships captured by Philip (§ 68): nominal 
ground for declaring war. 

Philip attacks the Thracian Chersonese, and then (winter) 
invades Scythia. Returning with large booty, he is 
attacked by the Triballi and wounded. (δὲ 67, 69.) 

Speech of Aeschines at Delphi (spring of 339), which stirs 
up the Amphissian War (§ 72). 

339—338. Amphictyonic Council (early autumn of 339) chooses. 
Philip general for the Amphissian War (§ 75). Shortly 
afterwards Philip passes Thermopylae and seizes Elatea 
(§ 76). 

Negotiations between Athens and Thebes, ending in 
alliance against Philip (§ 77). 

Campaign (winter and spring): allies victorious in “ winter 
battle” and ‘river battle.’’ Capture of mercenaries and 

Sa destruction of Amphissa by Philip. (ὃ 78.) q 
| 338—337- Battle of Chaeronea, 7th Metageitnion 338 (August 2 or — 4 
aa ~~ September 1): utter defeat of the allies (δ 79, 80). 

Peace of Demades (§ 81). 

‘Demosthenes delivers the eulogy on those who fell in the 
battle (§ 82). ; 

337-336. Demosthenes director of the Theoric Fund and retxyo- 
ποίος. 

Ctesiphon proposes to crown Demosthenes at the Great 
Dionysia (spring of 336). Aeschines brings a γραφὴ 


222: 


337—336. 


335—334- 


331 —33°- 
330—329. 


324--323. 


223---322. 


ΣΟΎ, 305 


παρανόμων against sana 
six years later.) 

Philip assassinated, summer of 336. 
him. 

Rebellion of Thebes. Alexander captures and destroys — 
the city (autumn of 335). 

Alexander demands the delivery of Demosthenes, Lycurgus, 
Hyperides, and other Athenian orators. 

Aristotle returns to Athens and teaches in the Lyceum. 

Alexander’s victory at Arbela (Oct. 1, 331). 

Rebellion of Spartan King Agis (early in 330), crushed 
by Antipater. 

Aristophon Archon. ‘Trial of suit of Aeschines against 
Ctesiphon (August 330). Ctesiphon acquitted by more 
than four-fifths of the votes. 

Demosthenes condemned to a fine of 50 talents for com- 
plicity in the affair of Harpalus. Unable to pay the 
fine, he went to prison, and afterwards into exile. 

Death of Alexander the Great (May, 323) at Babylon. 

Triumphant recall of Demosthenes from exile. 

Death of Aristotle at Chalcis, autumn of 322. 

Death of Hyperides October 5, and of Demosthenes 
October 12, 322. 


(The case came to trial 


Alexander succeeds 


THE ATTIC YEAR. 


During the period with which we are here concerned, the Athenians 
generally had a lunar year of 354 days, consisting of twelve months, 
alternately of 30 and 29 days, equivalent to 12 lunar months of 
294 days each. The longer months were called πλήρεις μῆνες, the 
shorter κοῖλοι μῆνες. 
difference in eight years amounting to go days. 


This fell short of the solar year by 113 days, the 
This was regulated by 


the cumbrous device of making the third, fifth, and eighth year in each 
cycle of eight years (ὀκταετηρίς) a leap year with 384 days, thus making 
the number of days in each cycle correct. (Thus (354 x 5) + (384 x 3) 
= 2022 -- 2651 χ 8.) The slight errors which remained were equated in 
various ways. The natural beginning of the Attic year was the summer 
‘solstice ; but the great difference in the length of the years allowed the 
beginning to vary from about June 16 to August 7. 

_ The twelve months in the ordinary year were as follows: 1 Heca- 
tombaeon, 2 Metageitnion, 3 Boedromion, 4 Pyanepsion, 5 Maemacterion, 


GD. ί 20 


306 HISTORICAL SKETCH. 


6 Posideon, 7 Gamelion, 8 Anthesterion, 9 Elaphebolion, τὸ Munychion, 
11 Thargelion, 12 Scirophorion. In the leap years a month of thirty 
days, Posideon II., was intercalated after Posideon. The same 
months appear to have been πλήρεις and κοῖλοι in different years. The 
first day of every month was generally called νουμηνία, and the last day 
evn καὶ νέα, old and new; the latter name, which probably was first 
applied to the full months, showing that the thirtieth day in these 
months belonged equally to the old and the new month. The days 
_ from the 2nd to the 9th were called δευτέρα, τρίτη, etc., sometimes with 
ἱσταμένου OF ἀρχομένου (SC. μηνός) added ; the roth was the δεκάς ; those 
from the 11th to the 19th were called πρώτη, δευτέρα, etc., with ἐπὶ δέκα 
or μεσοῦντος added, though this could be omitted when it was obvious 
that the middle of the month was meant. The 2oth was the eixds; and 
the days from the 21st to the 29th in the full months were generally 
counted backwards, δεκάτη φθίνοντος (2151), ἐνάτη, ὀγδόη, etc. to δευτέρα 
φθίνοντος (22nd, 23rd, etc. to 29th). It is generally thought that the 
δευτέρα φθίνοντος was omitted in the “hollow” months; but Usener 
thinks that the ἐνάτη φθίνοντος dropped out’. 

The following is a possible statement of the arrangement of the 
thirteen months in 347—346 B.C., in which the peace of Philocrates was 
made. ‘This was a leap year of 384 days, beginning July 6 and ending 
July 24. Other arrangements are possible and perhaps equally probable; 
but these would not affect any of the dates by more than a single day”. 


347—340 B.C. 
(384 days.) 
1. Hecatombaeon (30 days) begins July 6, 2418. 


2... Metageitnion (29 55, )) 3,7 Ἀπ » 
3... Boedromion τ᾿ (30 /,,° ) a.) ΒΟ. ” 


1 See Rhein. Mus. ΧΧΧΙν. 429: see Hist. § 46, note 5. The above outline is based 
on Boeckh’s elaborate investigation, Zur Geschichte der Mondcyclen der Hellenen, 
in the Jahrbiicher fiir Class. Philol. (N. F.), Suppl. Bd 1., Heft 1 (1855). Though 
many of the details of this system, as Boeckh stated it, have been disputed or cor- 
rected, its general principle still remains the basis of our knowledge of this difficult 
and complicated subject. 

> In this arrangement the system of equivalent days adopted by Schaefer has been 
regarded, except in the dates after the 2oth of Scirophorion, where he assumes that 
this month has only 29 days, and follows Usener in omitting the ἐνάτη φθίνοντος. But 
Schaefer, who rightly makes the 26th of Sciroph.=July 20, should by his system 
make the 29th of Sciroph. (which would be the last day of 347—346)=July 23, 80 


that the new year would begin July 24; whereas it began July 25, according to Boeckh, _ 


p. 28, and also according to Schaefer, 11. p. 295, note 2. 


a: THE ATTIC VEAR. 
π΄. 

© 5. Maemacterion (30 ,, ) ,, Nov. 1 
_ 6. Posideon eon.) 

- ΤΠ ΠῚ᾿ (30, ) ». 3 30 
Gamelion Gn 71} 

πῆ (30 ,, ) “,, Feb. 27 
Elaphebolion (29 ,, ) ,, March 29 
Munychion (30 ,, ) ,, April 27 
Thargelion fou jars) May 27 
. Scirophorion (30 ,, ) ,, June 25 


Thus Elaphebolion 18, 19 = April 15, 16; 
Munychion 3 =April 29; 


Thargelion 22 #=June τῇ; 
Boimomnornon 13. =July 7; - 
é; ” Pout ee 23 17 5 

2). 27 Ἐπ sh 24: 


_ Hecatombaeon 346—345 begins July 25. 


4. Pyanepsion (29 days) begins Cie rei ee 


2) 


3) 


99 


” Jan. 29; 346 B.C, 


2) 


33 


2) 


23 


2) 


307. 


nk a te 


ESSAY 3: 


I, 
Lhe Argument of the Oration, with Remarks on & 120, 121. 


1. ‘THE argument of this Oration follows no recognized model, and 
it cannot be brought under any rhetorical system of rules. The 
occasion was unique; and the orator treated it uniquely, and with a 
masterly skill which is far beyond the art of a mere rhetorician. 
Demosthenes is technically defending a client on a question of consti- 
tutional law; he is really defending his own public life and his reputa- 
tion as a patriot and a statesman against the unscrupulous charges 
of a personal enemy. He feels sure that the large body of his fellow- 
citizens who form the court will listen chiefly to his defence of himself 
and of his public policy and will overlook the technical questions of 
law ; and he judges rightly. ‘The skill, however, with which he keeps 
these technical questions in the background, so that the judges shall 
never lose sight of the higher questions of state policy, and the art ὮΝ 
which he conceals this art, are worthy of careful study. 

2. The indictment (γραφὴ παρανόμων) brings three Ἐν of 
illegality (παράνομα) against Ctesiphon’s bill for conferring a crown on 
Demosthenes: (1) the bill proposes to crown Demosthenes while he 
15. ἃ responsible magistrate (ἄρχων ὑπεύθυνος), which is forbidden by 
law; (2) it proposes to proclaim the crown in the theatre at the 
Crest Dionysiac festival, whereas the law requires such a crown to be | 
proclaimed elsewhere ; (3) it violates the law forbidding the insertion 
of false statements into the public records, such false statements being 
found in the clauses of the bill which praise Demosthenes, especial 
the words ἀρετῆς ἕνεκα καὶ ἀνδραγαθίας, --ὅτι διατελεῖ καὶ λέγων καὶ 
πράττων τὰ ἀριστα τῷ δήμῳ,---«η πρόθυμος ἐστι ποιεῖν ὅ τι δύναται ἀγαθόν... 


Aeschines, who must have felt the weakness of the vague charge of a 


illegality in the last count, dwells with great energy and with his 


1 See Aesch. III. 49, 237, Dem. Cor. 57, where the decree professes to be Ὁ 


quoted. 


Pr] THE ARGUMENT OF THE ORATION. 309 


| most powerful arguments on the first count, on which (so far as we can 

_ see) his position was legally unassailable. He shows beyond question 
that Demosthenes held two important offices at the time of Ctesiphon’s 
_ proposal, for which he would still be responsible (ὑπεύθυνος) when 


_ puts this strong argument in the front of his attack. On his second 
point, the illegality of the proposed place of proclamation, he professes 
to be equally strong; but here the actual state of the law is uncertain, 
and we cannot judge of the strength of the argument. He then dis- 
cusses the life and character of Demosthenes, to show that the state- 
ments on which Ctesiphon justifies his proposal to crown him are false 
and therefore illegal. After a few words of introduction, followed by a 
short account of the private life of Demosthenes, he treats of his public 
life at great length, under four heads: (1) the period at which the Peace 
of Philocrates was made; (2) the time between the peace and the 
renewal of the war with Philip-; (3) the war which ended in the battle 
of Chaeronea ; (4) the time from Chaeronea to the trial of the case. He 
occupies the remainder of his time in the discussion of various matters 
which have a bearing on the patriotism or statesmanship of Demosthenes, 
aiming in all to show the falseness of the terms used by Ctesiphon. In 
several passages he urges the judges not to allow Ctesiphon to call on 
Demosthenes to plead his cause; and, if they permit Demosthenes to 
speak at all, to compel him to follow the same order of argument in the 
defence which he has himself adopted in the attack. This last would 
have compelled Demosthenes to reply in the beginning to the strong 
argument of Aeschines on the illegality of crowning a responsible 
magistrate ; this Demosthenes has no idea of doing, as it would weaken 
his whole position before the court. 

3. The argument of Aeschines, briefly stated, is as follows: 


I. Prooemium: §§ 1—8. 
II. Argument on the responsibility of magistrates : δὲ 9—31. 
III. Argument on the place of proclamation: δὲ 32—48. 
IV. Review of the Life of Demosthenes (δὲ 49—167):— 
1. Introduction: δὲ 49, 50. 
2. Private Life of Demosthenes: δὲ 51—453. 
3. Four divisions of the Public Life of Demosthenes, δὲ 54— 
57, discussed as follows :— 
(a) ‘The Peace of Philocrates (346 B.c.): δὲ 58—-78. 
(4) ‘The time of peace until the renewal of war with Philip 
in 340 B.c.: δὲ 79—105. 


the crown was proclaimed ; and this would be illegal. He naturally — 


ν΄ 


310 ESSA YS. [1- 


(c) The Amphissian War, and other events ending with the 
Battle of Chaeronea in 338 B.c.: §§ 106—158. 

(4) The time from 338 to 330 B.c. (the year of the trial): 
§§ 159167. 


V. Discussion of various points in the life and character of 
Demosthenes, and general arguments: δὲ 168—259. 


VI. Peroration: ὃ 260. 


4. It might seem natural, at first thought, for Demosthenes to 
defend Ctesiphon against the three charges of the indictment in regular 
succession. But this would have sacrificed the argumentative power of 
his speech to mere simplicity of arrangement. If he had followed the 
order of Aeschines (which Aeschines is urgent to have him do) and 
dealt first with the question of his responsibility as a magistrate, he 
would have begun his argument at its weakest point, on which he had 
nothing to say which really answered the cogent legal argument of 
Aeschines. Nothing could have been worse for his case than this. If, 
on the other hand, he had introduced this matter after the discussion of 
his public life, the weakness of his conclusion would have injured (per- 
haps fatally) the effect which his argument had already made. It was © 
important, therefore, to bring in his weaker argument between two 
divisions of his historical statement, and thus conceal its defects from 
observation’. He could not make a sémgle break in his narrative and 
there introduce this foreign subject without making his design too 
obvious and injuring his case. But he artfully divides his account of 
his public life into ‘zee parts, for plausible reasons, which do not 
suggest his real object. In ὃ 9 he complains of the charges ‘foreign 
to the indictment” (ἔξω τῆς γραφῆς, § 34) which Aeschines has brought 
against him ; and to these he proposes to reply before he comes to the 
charges which properly belong to the case. Under this head he puts 
the charges relating to the Peace of Philocrates (346 B.c.), and he 
proceeds at once to deal with the negotiations which led to this event. 
He would never have thought of omitting this important matter, in 
which later events had triumphantly vindicated his own course of 
action ; and his indignation at Aeschines for bringing it into the case 


' Libanius saw this artful device: see his Hypothesis, ὃ 6, ὁ δὲ ῥήτωρ καὶ ἀπὸ τῆς 
πολιτείας τὴν ἀρχὴν ἐποιήσατο καὶ πάλιν εἰς ταύτην τὸν λόγον κατέστρεψε, τεχνικῶς 
ποιῶν. See the Second Hypoth. ὃ 5, Τοὺς μὲν yap ἄλλους δύο νόμους, τόν τε τῶν 
ὑπευθύνων καὶ τὸν τοῦ κηρύγματος, εἰς τὸ μέσον τοῦ λόγου ἀπέρριψε, στρατηγικῶς 


κακοὺς ἐς μέσσον ἐλάσσας, τῷ δὲ ἰσχυροτάτῳ εἰς τὰ ἄκρα προσκέχρηται, τὸ σαθρν 


τῶν ἄλλων ἐξ ἑκατέρου ῥωννύς. See also note on Cor. 56°. 


ea THE ARGUMENT OF THE ORATION. 311 


is all feigned. He is thus able to tell the story of this important period 
_ in his public life before he begins the real argument (as he represents 
_ it), even before the reading of the indictment. This has the effect of 
_ securing the good-will of the court for himself and damaging the case of 
_ Aeschines in advance, by an eloquent harangue on a subject which (as | 
he claims) has been unfairly brought into the case (δὲ 17—52). 
} 5. After the reading of the indictment and a few general remarks 
_ upon’ this document, he proceeds (§§ 60—101) to a general defence of 
his policy of opposition to Philip, and of the course taken by Athens 
_ under his leadership before the renewal of the war with Philip in 340. 
He then speaks of his own trierarchic reform (§§ 102—109), and now 
(ὃ 110) declares that he has brought forward sufficient evidence to justify 
_ the language of Ctesiphon’s decree in his praise. He states that he is 
here omitting the most important of his public acts (those concerning 
the alliance with Thebes and the other events which preceded the 
battle of Chaeronea), and he leaves it doubtful whether he will speak of 
ΠΟ these hereafter. He omits them now, he says, chiefly because he will 
not longer postpone the questions about the εὔθυναι (i.e. his responsibility 
_as a magistrate) and the place of proclamation, but also because he can 
assume that such recent events are well known to all the judges even if 
he does not mention them. Demosthenes has not the slightest intention 
of omitting these most important events, in which he gained the greatest 
diplomatic triumph of his life; but he postpones them until he can 
Introduce them later as an offset to the acts of Aeschines done in Philip’s 
Interest, when the account of them forms the most eloquent passage in 
_ the oration (δὲ 160—226). By this skilful plan he gains two important 
objects. First, he divides the account of his political life into three 
parts, and avoids wearying the judges by telling the whole story (cover- 
ing eight most eventful years) in one continuous narrative, in which it 
would have been far less effective. Secondly, he succeeds in introducing 
his replies to the arguments περὶ τοῦ παρανόμου (ὃ 110) just after one 
historic narrative and just before another, where they are least conspicu- 
- ous, and where the weakness of the reply on the εὔθυναι is soon forgotten, 
‘if it is noticed at all, amid the exciting events which led to Chaeronea. 
The three courses of events thus divided are so naturally distinct, that 
‘nothing is lost by their division to be compared with the double gain. 
6. The following is the course of the argument in the oration on 


the Crown’. 

1 The subject of each division is stated in the notes with greater detail where the 
division begins. See, for example, the remarks which precede the notes on 88 1, 9, 
53, 126, 227, 297, and elsewhere. 


312 


ESSAYS. (1. 


I. Prooemium: δὲ 1—8. 


II. Reply to charges foreign to the indictment (δὲ g—52) :— 


I. 
ae 


3. 


A. 
B. 


REE 


ἘΝῚ 


Introduction: § 9, 
Charges against private life: δὲ 10, 11. 
Public policy (§§ 12—52):— 
Introductory: §§ 12—16. 
Peace of Philocrates (§§ 17— 52) :— 
(4) Introductory: § 17. 
(ὁ). Narrative: §§ 18—49. 
(c) Conclusion: δὲ 50—52. 


Reply to the charges of the indictment (δὲ 53—125) :— 

Introductory : δ 58—59. 

Defence of his public policy (confined chiefly to the period 
from 346 to 340 B.C.) and of his trierarchic law: δὲ 60— 
109. 

Reply to charge of responsibility as a magistrate: δὲ 110— 
119. 

Reply to argument about the place of proclamation: δὲ 120, 
121. ; 

Conclusion: δὲ 122—125., 


Life and character of Aeschines; and his public policy in 
the interest of Philip, compared with his own agency in 
negotiating an alliance with Thebes against Philip (8 126 
—-226):— 

Parentage and life of Aeschines: δὲ 126—181. 

Lesser political offences of Aeschines: δὲ 182—188. 

The Amphissian War, stirred up by the speech of Aeschines 
at Delphi (339 B.c.): δὲ 189—159. 

Negotiation of Theban alliance by Demosthenes (339—338 
B.C.),—continuation of narrative interrupted at ὃ 110, 
Into this account is introduced (δὲ 189—210) a defence 
of the whole policy of Athens, under his leadership, in 
opposition to Philip: δὲ 160—226. 


With ὃ 226 the defence of Ctesiphon, properly so called, is finished. ‘The orator 


has reviewed his whole political life and has justified the language of Ctesiphon’s — 


decree; and he has replied briefly to the other charges of illegality. In the time which 


remains he 


discusses other matters suggested by the speech of Aeschines. 


V. Replies to three arguments of Aeschines (§§ 227—295) :— 


κ᾿ 


Discussion of the comparison (Aeschines 59—61) of the 


THE ARGUMENT OF THE ORATION. 413 


case against Demosthenes to an account of money ex- 
pended : ἐδ 227. 251]. 

2. Reply to the remarks of Aeschines upon his “bad fortune,” 
and comparison of his own fortune with that of Aeschines : 
δὲ 252—275. 

3. Reply to the charge of being a crafty rhetorician : §§ 276—296. 


ΕΟ VI. The Epilogue (ἐπίλογος) follows, in which he compares himself 

- as a statesman with Aeschines, protesting against the 
comparison of himself with the heroes of the past. There 
is also a recapitulation of some matters already discussed ': 
δὲ 207. 828. 


VII. ‘The Peroration, in a single earnest sentence, is an appeal 
to the Gods for help to Athens in her humiliation: § 324. 


Remarks on the Argument of S§ 120, 121. 


(1) In these sections Demosthenes replies, with astonishing brevity 
but with wrathful indignation, to the elaborate argument of Aeschines 
(32—48) about the place of proclamation. He puts his whole argument 
into a quotation from a law, which was read entire to the court, and 
then bursts out in triumphant invective against Aeschines for his audacity 
in suppressing the one important clause in this law in presenting it 
before the court. Unfortunately we have only a fragment of the law 
presented by Demosthenes ; but this must be authentic: πλὴν ἐάν τινας 
ὃ δῆμος ἢ ἡ βουλὴ ψηφίσηται" τούτους δ᾽ ἀναγορευέτω. It must have been 
one which did not make the passionate outbreak which followed appear 
ridiculous to the court. On the other hand, we cannot for a moment 
believe that Aeschines (32) produced a law requiring those who were 
_ crowned bythe Senate and by the Assembly to be crowned before those 
bodies azd nowhere e/se, and actually suppressed a clause of that very 
law containing the words quoted by Demosthenes, which allowed either 
Senate or Assembly to make an exception to the law at their pleasure. 
When we remember that this mutilated law must have been quoted 


1 Aristotle (Rhet. 111. 19!) thus states the proper substance of the Epilogue: ὁ δ᾽ 
ἐπίλογος σύγκειται ἐκ τεττάρων, ἔκ τε TOD πρὸς ἑαυτὸν κατασκευάσαι εὖ τὸν ἀκροατὴν Kal 
τὸν ἐναντίον φαύλως, καὶ ἐκ τοῦ αὐξῆσαι καὶ ταπεινῶσαι, καὶ ἐκ τοῦ εἰς τὰ πάθη τὸν 
ἀκροατὴν καταστῆσαι, καὶ ἐξ ἀναμνήσεως. These four points,—(1) making the hearer 
favourable to yourself and unfavourable to your opponent, (2) amplification and de- 
preciation, (3) exciting the hearer’s emotions, (4) recapitulation,—seem more character- 
istic of §§ 297—323, to which Fox confines the epilogue, than of the longer passage, 
_ §§ 252—323, to which Blass would extend it. 


314 ESSAYS. Γι. 


in the indictment, read to the court by its clerk after being submitted 
to the scrutiny of the presiding Thesmothetae at the anacrisis, and also 
posted in the court-room (see note on § 111”), we cannot ascribe such 
audacity even to Aeschines, or such careless indifference at once to six 
archons, the court, and its officers. 

(2) I think we must assume (a) that Aeschines quoted a law forbid- 
ding the proclamation in the theatre, and that ¢/zs Jaw had no such 
addition as Demosthenes appears to make to it, and (0) that Demos- 
thenes quoted another law, which (as he claimed) applied to the same 
cases but had the proviso ἐὰν μή (or πλὴν ἐάν) twas 6 δῆμος ἢ ἡ βουλὴ 
ψηφίσηται, etc. This supposes a conflict of laws, or at least two laws 
which could be harmonized only by a forced interpretation. The elabo- 
rate argument of Aeschines (37—39), to prove that no such conflict 
could occur in the Athenian laws, at once makes us suspect that this is 
the real solution of the difficulty. Even he admits that such conflicts 
might sometimes occur, καν τι τοιοῦτον εὑρίσκωσιν (39). What now was 
the law which Demosthenes brought before the court? It must have 
been the Dionysiac law, which Aeschines describes, but which, he 
maintains, had nothing to do with crowns conferred by the Senate or 
the Assembly, but concerned only those conferred upon Athenians by 
foreign states. These last, he admits, might be proclaimed in the theatre 
by special vote. 

(3) Aeschines thus describes this law in 44: διαρρήδην ἀπαγορεύει 
μήτ᾽ οἰκέτην ἀπελευθεροῦν ἐν τῷ θεάτρῳ, μήθ᾽ ὑπὸ τῶν φυλετῶν ἢ δημοτῶν 
ἀναγορεύεσθαι στεφανούμενον μήθ᾽ ὑπ᾽ ἄλλου (φησὶ) μηδενὸς, ἢ ἄτιμον 
εἶναι τὸν κήρυκα. He then argues, not in a very persuasive way}, that 
the words μήθ᾽ ὑπ᾽ ἄλλου μηδενός cannot reasonably apply to any except 
foreign crowns, and then (47) adds: καὶ διὰ τοῦτο προσέθηκεν ὃ νομοθέτης 
μη) κηρύττεσθαι τὸν ἀλλότριον στέφανον ἐν τῷ θεάτρῳ ἐὰν μὴ ψηφίσηται ὃ 
δῆμος. It will be noticed that he does not quote the last clause (ἐὰν... 
δῆμος) In connection with the law itself in 44, but only after his own 
interpretation of the law in 47. This is of itself suspicious, as it con- 
ceals the only important point, the exact relation of this clause to the 
rest of the law. The clause which precedes ἐὰν... δῆμος in 47, μὴ 
κηρύττεσθαι τὸν ἀλλότριον στέφανον ἐν τῷ θεάτρῳ, is certainly no part of 
the law, for with this the law could need no interpretation. Further, the 


* His only argument (in 45) for what seems a very forced interpretation of these 
words is that the law which he first read (in 32), a distinct one, excluded all crowns 
conferred by the Senate or the Assembly. This assumes the impossibility of any 
conflict of laws, the most important point in the discussion. 


1] REMARKS ON THE ARGUMENT. 315 


words following πλὴν ἐάν... ψηφίσηται in Demosthenes (121), τούτους δ᾽ ἀνα- 
γορευέτω, have no sense if added to these words in Aeschines (47). They 
have, however, a very significant meaning if added to ἢ ἄτιμον εἶναι τὸν 
κήρυκα in Aeschines (44), supplying κῆρυξ as the subject of the impera- 
tive. Now the last part of Aeschines 44 and ἐὰν μὴ ψηφίσηται ὃ δῆμος in ᾿ 
47 are the only real quotations from the Dionysiac law in Aeschines, and 
πλὴν ἐάν τινας... .ἀγορευέτω is evidently a quotation from the law read by 
Demosthenes (121). If we fit these together, we have the most probable 
reconstruction of the Dionysiac law as it was presented by Demos- 
thenes, as follows :--- μήτ᾽ οἰκέτην ἀπελευθεροῦν ἐν τῷ θεάτρῳ, μήθ᾽ ὑπὸ τῶν 
φυλετῶν ἢ δημοτῶν ἀναγορεύεσθαι στεφανούμενον μήθ᾽ ὑπ᾽ ἄλλου (φησὶ) 
μηδενὸς, ἢ ἄτιμον εἶναι τὸν κήρυκα, πλὴν ἐάν τινας ὃ δῆμος ἢ ἡ βουλὴ 
ψηφίσηται, τούτους δ᾽ ἀναγορευέτω. This might easily have been read to 
the court in opposition to the other law read by order of Aeschines ; 
and, so far as we can see, Demosthenes was justified in assuming that 
μήθ᾽ ὑπ᾽ ἄλλου μηδενός referred to all who had crowns to confer, not 
excluding the Senate and the Assembly. What he needed was some 
_ law which allowed the proclamation in the theatre, and the court would 
be little concerned whether this was consistent with the law read by 
Aeschines. 

(4) This explanation of the difficulty becomes much simpler if we 

suppose that all the confused talk about the Dionysiac law in Aeschines 
is an addition to his speech made after hearing the contemptuous reply 
_ of Demosthenes to his simple argument in 32—34. If we admit that 
Aeschines actually spoke the long passage about the Dionysiac law 
(35—48) before the court, it seems incredible that Demosthenes 
could ignore so elaborate an argument in his reply and merely quote 
“the law” as if there were but one. The court would hardly have been 
satisfied with so summary and contemptuous an answer, which took no 
notice of the account of the nature and purpose of the Dionysiac law 
which they had just heard. I confess the whole passage (35—48) in 
the speech of Aeschines has often seemed to me (on other grounds) to 
be an addition made after the trial. It is a piece of special pleading, 
which greatly weakens the force of the argument, and it is clearly an 
answer (and an unsatisfactory one) to the reply of Demosthenes. It 
_ should be treated like other similar passages in Aeschines, for example, 
the reply to the argument of Demosthenes about Philammon, the boxer, 
in 189. 

(5) One fact is now made certain by inscriptions: whatever may 
have been the letter of the law against proclamation in the theatre, such 


316 ESSA YS. [11. 


proclamations were very frequent at Athens in the fourth century B.c., 
and earlier and Jater. The law was a dead letter, and Demosthenes was 
justified in making light of this part of the accusation. See note on 
Cor. § 120”, with the references to inscriptions. 


Lys 
The γραφὴ παρανόμων. 


1. The Athenian γραφὴ παρανόμων, or indictment for proposing 
wlegal measures, could be brought by any citizen against one who 
was charged with proposing a decree (ψήφισμα) which violated a law 
(νόμος), or with causing the enactment of a law which was opposed to 
an existing law without expressly providing for the repeal of the latter. 
The laws (νόμοι) of Athens were a comparatively fixed code, ascribed 
generally to Solon, but consisting of the original Solonic laws, enlarged 
and otherwise modified by succeeding enactments. These always formed a 
special code, which was superior to the enactments of the Senate and the 
Assembly and was not subject to repeal or modification by these bodies. 
An enactment of the Senate and Assembly, the ordinary legislative 
bodies (in the modern sense of the term), was called a decree or ψήφισμα. 
This could legally contain no provisions which were opposed to a νόμος, 
and any such provision made it void. ‘The γραφὴ παρανόμων was the 
simple but efficient process provided by the Attic law for causing an 
“illegal” decree or law to be annulled, and also for punishing the 
proposer. The mover, however, could be held personally responsible 
only for one year from the time of the proposal of a decree or the 
enactment: of a law; after a year the decree or law could be attacked 
and annulled by the same process, while the mover was exposed 
to no risk. Whoever brought a γραφὴ παρανόμων was required to 
bind himself publicly by an oath (called ὑπωμοσία) to prosecute the 
case; after this oath was taken, a decree or law was suspended if it 
had already been enacted, and a decree which had passed’ only the — 
Senate (a προβούλευμα) could not be brought before the Assembly for 
action until the suit had been tried and settled in favour of the | 
defendant. (See note on Cor. ὃ 103°.) It is probable that the γραφὴ 
παρανόμων could be brought only after the actual enactment of a 
νόμος, while it could be brought against a ψήφισμα at any one of three 


: ud THE γραφὴ παρανόμων. 317 


stages: (1) after its acceptance by the Senate, (2) after passing the 
_ Assembly, (3) after the lapse of a year from its proposal’. 

7 2. The distinction between a νόμος and a ψήφισμα at Athens was 
most important*, <A ψήφισμα was an enactment of the Senate and 

Assembly (or of the Assembly alone when the Senate had given it autho- 
rity to act by itself), which, if it was not in conflict with any higher 
authority, had the full force of a law. A νόμος could be changed only by 

an elaborate process, which was chiefly under the control of a body of 
_ Heliastic judges, who acted as a court rather than as a legislative body. 

In the first meeting of the Assembly in each year a general question was 

put to the people, whether they would permit propositions to be made 

for changes in the laws, those who had such propositions to make 

having doubtless informed the Assembly what changes were to be 
proposed. The people might refuse to allow such propositions to be 
_ made, which ended the matter for that year. If they voted to permit 

them, all who had such proposals to make were required to post written 

notices of them before the statues of the Eponymi (the heroes from whom 

the ten tribes were named) in the market-place, and also to give copies 
of these to the clerk of the Assembly, who read the proposals to the 
_ people in each of the two following meetings of the Assembly. In 

the last of these meetings (the third one of the year), the people, if after 
_ consideration they saw fit, voted to refer the proposed changes in the 
_ laws to a special commission, called νομοθέται, chosen like an ordinary 

court (δικαστήριον) from those who were qualified to sit as judges for 
that year and had taken the Heliastic oath. The whole proceeding 
before this board was conducted according to the forms of law. The 

proposer of the new law appeared as plaintiff and argued his case 

against the old law and for his own proposal, while advocates appointed 

_ by the state defended the existing law. The question of enacting the 
new law or retaining the existing one was decided by a vote of the 
νομοθέται, which, if favourable to the new law, made that one of the 
fixed code of νόμοι. It was strictly commanded by the Solonic law, 
that no new law should be enacted unless all laws opposed to it were 
_ expressly repealed ; and, further, that no law should be repealed unless. 
a new law were proposed, and accepted by the νομοθέται as suitable and 

fitting (ἐπιτήδειος) to take its place®*. 

1 For further details of the γραφὴ παρανόμων see Meier and Schodmann, Att. Proc. 

pp. 428—437. 

* See Tarbell in Am. Journal of Philol. x. pp. 79—83. 

ᾷ 3. See Schémann, Griech. Alterth. I. pp. 411—414, English transl. 387—3903. 
_ Thumser-Hermann, Staatsalt. § 91, pp. 525—530. See § τὸ (below). 


318 ESSAYS. [n. 


3. It was only natural, as the democracy increased in power, that 
the distinction between decrees and laws should be neglected, and that 
the sovereign people should pass decrees which usurped the functions of 
laws and violated the spirit, if not the letter, of existing laws. We find 
in the orators many intimations that this was a growing evil. Against 
this dangerous tendency the γραφὴ παρανόμων was the only legal 
security. We cannot wonder, therefore, that this is extolled as the great 
stronghold of constitutional liberty, the chief protection of free govern- 

“ment against lawless demagogues. Even Aeschines, who had done as 
much as any man to degrade the process, speaks of it as we speak of 
the abeas corpus’. It is a most significant fact that one of the first 
steps taken by the oligarchs who were establishing the government of 
Four Hundred in 411 B.c. was the suspension of the γραφὴ παρανόμων. 

4. The principle upon which the γραφὴ παρανόμων is based must 
always be recognized wherever the legislative power is limited by a 
superior code of laws or a written constitution to which all its enact- 
ments must conform. In such a case the allegiance of every citizen is 
due, first and foremost, to the superior law, as the supreme law of the 
land, and he cannot legally be compelled to obey the lower enactment. 
But as each citizen cannot be allowed to decide for himself whether an 
act of the legislature is or is not in harmony with the superior law, the 
decision must be entrusted to some tribunal which has authority to 
prevent a citizen from suffering unjustly if he disobeys an illegal enact- 
ment, and also to prevent the law from being disobeyed at the caprice 
of individuals. ᾿ 

5. This principle was first recognized, so far as we know, in the 
Athenian γραφὴ παρανόμων. Precisely the same principle is at the basis 
of what is now known as “the American doctrine of Constitutional 
Law,” under which the Supreme Court of the United States has the 
power to declare acts of Congress or of the state legislatures unconstitu- 
tional and to treat them as without authority*. The Constitution of the 

1 See Aesch. 111. 3—8: ὃν ὑπολείπεται μέρος τῆς πολιτείας, ai τῶν παρανόμων 
γραφαί. εἰ δὲ ταύτας καταλύσετε,...προλέγω ὑμῖν ὅτι λήσετε κατὰ μικρὸν τῆς πολιτείας 
τισὶ παραχωρήσαντες (5). See the whole passage. 

2 Thuc. VIII. 67: ἐσήνεγκαν ἄλλο μὲν οὐδὲν, αὐτὸ δὲ τοῦτο, ἐξεῖναι μὲν ἀζήμιον 
εἰπεῖν γνώμην ἣν ἄν τις βούληται" ἢν δέ τις τὸν εἰπόντα ἢ Ὑράψηται παρανόμων 
ἢ ἄλλῳ τῳ τρόπῳ βλάψῃ, μεγάλας ζημίας ἐπέθεσαν. So Aristot. Pol. Ath. 205 

3 The Supreme Courts of the several states have the same right of declaring 
unconstitutional and null acts of their own state legislatures, as conflicting with 


either the state constitution or the U.S. constitution. There is an appeal to the 
U.S. Supreme Court in the latter case, but only when the state court upholds the 


state law. 


1. THE γραφὴ παρανόμων. 319 


United States, the solemn compact by which thirteen originally in- 
dependent states were united in a single nation, is declared in one of 
its own articles to be “‘the supreme law of the land,” to which all 
legislation of Congress or of the several states must conform’. An 
amendment, ratified in 1791, provides that “the powers not delegated 
to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the 
states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.” In the 
working of this dual system of legislation and responsibility, questions 
- soon arose which called for the exercise of judicial authority to determine 
whether an act of Congress or of a state legislature was in conflict with 
the Federal Constitution, or whether an act of Congress usurped powers 
which the Constitution reserved to the states. This authority was 
plainly vested in the Federal courts, especially in the Supreme Court as 
the highest court of appeal in the land. The power came by direct 
descent from the colonial period, when royal charters, to which the 
colonial legislation must conform, stood in the position of written 
constitutions. The colonial courts could declare laws null which were 
opposed to the superior authority, and in certain cases the King in 
Council by decree exercised the same right®. After the revolution, 
before the Constitution was ratified, several states adopted the old 
charters as temporary constitutions, and the state courts sometimes 
declared laws null which did not conform to these; this, however, was 
not allowed without grave opposition *. 

6. It is a mistake to suppose that the Supreme Court can declare 
an act of Congress unconstitutional and void on its own motion. Not 
only can it not do this, but it cannot declare an act unconstitutional 
simply because it is asked to do so by petition. To enable it to act on 
a constitutional question, a case must come before it in the ordinary 
course of litigation, generally when a person who feels aggrieved by the 
operation of a law which he believes to be unconstitutional appeals from 
the decision of a lower court on this point and thus brings the constitu- 


1 Const. of U.S. Art. 6: ‘‘ This constitution, and the laws of the United States 
made in pursuance thereof,...shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in 
every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the constitution or laws of any state to 
the contrary notwithstanding.” 

2 A decree of the King in Council, annulling a provincial act of nearly thirty years’ 
standing, issued Feb. 15, 1727-28, is given in the Massachusetts Hist. Collections, 
Series vi. vol. 5, pp. 496—509. 

Ὁ For the whole subject of American Constitutional Law, see Bryce, Am. Common- 
wealth 1. Chap. 23; and J. B. Thayer, Am. Doctrine of Constitutional Law, Boston, 


1893. 


320 ESSA YS. [τὰ 


tional question directly before the Supreme Court in such a way that it 
must be decided. The decision, though nominally affecting only the 
legality of the appellant’s action in disobeying the law, really settles the 
whole question of the validity of the law itself; and it stands as a valid 
precedent, which all courts must recognize, unless it is reversed by a 
different decision on another case’. It is, moreover, a recognized 
principle in such cases, that a law is not to be declared unconstitutional 
unless the judges are convinced that it is so beyond all reasonable 
doubt. A Federal judge might with perfect consistency refuse to set 
aside a law as unconstitutional when as a legislator he had voted against 
it on this very ground’. 

7. In the comparison which we are making, the decrees of the 
Athenian Senate and Assembly correspond to the laws of the U.S. 
Congress, and the Solonic laws of Athens to the U.S. Constitution. 
The dangers of a democracy which is not kept in balance by the 
constant pressure of a higher law, keeping the ordinary legislation in 
check, were never stated more clearly than by Aristotle in his discussion 
of constitutional and unconstitutional democracy*. His third and fourth 
forms of democracy are those in which all citizens, or all who are 
ἀνυπεύθυνοι, can hold office, while law rules (ἄρχειν δὲ τὸν νόμον). The 
fifth and lowest form is that in which, other conditions being the same, 
“the multitude and not the law is supreme; and this is when decrees 
and not the law are supreme.” “There,” he says, “the people has 
become a monarch, one composed of many; and it seeks to exercise 
monarchical power because it is not ruled by law, and so becomes 
despotic.” “Such a democracy,” he adds, ‘‘is related to other demo- 
cracies as tyranny to other monarchies, both having the same character, 
and both wielding a despotic power over the better part of the state ; 


its decrees are like the tyrant’s edicts*”’ The former is a constitu- 


1 A lower Federal Court can declare a law unconstitutional, and the decision 
naturally stands as a precedent in the court which made it, and for other courts of 
the same grade, as regards the case in question, unless it is reversed on appeal to the 
Supreme Court. 

2 See Thayer, ibid. pp. 13—26. 

3 Aristot. Pol. vi. (Iv-) 4, 88 22—28. 

4 Aristot. ibid. $$ 24—28: κύριον δ᾽ εἶναι τὸ πλῆθος Kai μὴ τὸν νόμον" τοῦτο δὲ | 
γίνεται ὅταν τὰ ψηφίσματα κύρια ἢ ἀλλὰ μὴ ὁ νόμος....«μόναρχος γὰρ ὁ δῆμος γίνεται, 
σύνθετος εἷς ἐκ πολλῶν....ὁ δ᾽ οὖν τοιοῦτος δῆμος, ἅτε μόναρχος ὦν, ζητεῖ μοναρχεῖν διὰ τὸ 
μὴ ἄρχεσθαι ὑπὸ νόμου, καὶ γίνεται δεσποτικός... καὶ ἔστιν ὁ τοιοῦτος δῆμος ἀνάλογον τῶν 
μοναρχιῶν τῇ τυραννίδι. διὸ καὶ τὸ ἦθος τὸ αὐτὸ καὶ ἄμφω δεσποτικὰ τῶν βελτιόνων, 
καὶ τὰ ψηφίσματα ὥσπερ ἐκεῖ τὰ ἐπιτάγματα. Aristotle derives the government which 
he calls δεσποτικὴ ἀρχή from the slaveholder’s power over his slave: see Pol. II. 8, 2, 


an] THE γραφὴ παρανόμων. 221 
tional democracy, with the power of the people to pass decrees limited 
_ by a fixed code of laws; the latter is an unconstitutional democracy, 
which gives the people full power to enact whatever they please, subject 
to no restraint from any superior law which can enforce its authority 
through the courts. The supremacy of constitutional law, as Aristotle | 
clearly saw, is the one great security which distinguishes a safe demo- 
 cracy from a dangerous one; and the United States have constant reason 
to bless the foresight which provided them with this protection in their 
original compact?. 

8. Though France, Germany, Switzerland, and other countries have 
"written constitutions, they make no use of the principle which we are 
. considering, except that in Germany and (under some limitations) 
in Switzerland the Federal courts may declare a state or cantonal law 
invalid if it conflicts with the Federal constitution. In England no 
such constitutional questions can arise for the courts to consider, 
| because Parliament, the only legislative power, is absolute, and recog- 
_ nizes no law superior to its own®. As Bryce says, “what are called in 
England constitutional statutes, such as Magna Charta, the Bill of 
Rights, the Act of Settlement,...are merely ordinary laws which could 

be repealed by Parliament at any moment in exactly the same way as it 
can repeal a highway act or lower the duty on tobacco.” Parliament, 
_he adds, “can abolish when it pleases any institution of the country, the 
Crown, the House of Lords, the Established Church, the House of 
Commons, Parliament itself.” The γραφὴ παρανόμων, therefore, has no 

' analogy in the English Constitution. It is obvious that England, with 
her more conservative form of government, yet lacks one check upon 
_ possible radical legislation, which has proved so effective, and yet so 
simple, under a pure democracy in the United States. Congress could 
not, except by an act of revolution, deprive the President of any of his 


ἔστι δὲ τυραννὶς μὲν μοναρχία δεσποτικὴ τῆς πολιτικῆς κοινωνίας, and I. 7, 1, οὐ ταὐτόν 
ἐστι δεσποτεία καὶ πολιτική... ἡ μὲν yap ἐλευθέρων φύσει, ἡ δὲ δούλων ἐστίν. 

_1 There is no reason for thinking that the example of the γραφὴ παρανόμων even 
remotely suggested the U.S. system; and the analogy between the two is not 
mentioned, so far as I am aware, by any writer on the U.S. Constitution. The 
earliest reference to the subject which I have seen in print is in an excellent article in 
the Yale Review for May, 1893, on ‘‘An Athenian Parallel to a Function of our 
Supreme Court,” by Professor T. D. Goodell of New Haven. The striking parallel 
can, however, hardly have escaped the notice of American classical scholars ; and I 
cannot have been alone in using it, as I have done for the past twenty years or more, 
in explaining the γραφὴ παρανόμων to college classes. 

Γι 5 See Bryce, Am. Commonwealth I. 237, 238, 254, 272, 430; and Thayer, Am. 
Doctr. of Const. Law, 4. 


G. Ὁ, 21 


322 ESSAYS, [11. 


prerogatives, or impair in the least the rights of its two houses, or 
interfere with the power of the Supreme Court to annul unconstitutional 
legislation when a case comes before it in the course of litigation. 

9. The γραφὴ παρανόμων legally turned on the simple question of 
the agreement or disagreement of a given law or decree with the existing 
laws, and the court had strictly no legal right to consider the general 
question of the expediency or even the justice of the enactment which 
was on trial. Nevertheless, the arguments in such cases abound in 
appeals to the court to reject a law because it is inexpedient or unjust ; 
and there can be no doubt that such questions were an important part 
of the case which the judges considered. But such a natural extension 
of a counsel’s privilege cannot weigh against definite statements on the 
other side made by the orators’. It could not be expected that a 
litigant or advocate in Athens, addressing a large body of judges, of 
whom few could even understand a strictly legal argument, should not 
try to impress them with a conviction that he had justice and expediency, 
as well as law, on his side. We can easily pardon an Athenian orator 
for availing himself of this aid, when such arguments are frequently 
addressed to the U.S. Supreme Court by eager counsel on questions of 
pure constitutional law, and when even the judges in giving their 
decisions sometimes enforce their legal judgments by considerations of 
expediency. 

10. It has sometimes been thought that a decree or a law could 
be indicted by the γραφὴ παρανόμων as imexpedient (ἀνεπιτήδειον) ἢ. 
But we now know from Aristotle’s Constitution of Athens that the 
γραφὴ ἐάν τις μὴ ἐπιτήδειον θῇ νόμον was a distinct process from the 
γραφὴ παρανόμων, and it is probably the one to which the doubtful law 
quoted in Demosth. xxiv. 33 refers, by which any one who procured the 
repeal of a law and neglected to substitute for it a new law which was. 
fitting (ἐπιτήδειον) could be indicted by a special process *. 


1 See Aesch. III. 199, 200: ὥσπερ γὰρ ἐν TH τεκτονικῇ, ὅταν εἰδέναι βουλώμεθα τὸ: 
ὀρθὸν καὶ τὸ μὴ, τὸν κανόνα προσφέρομεν..., οὕτω καὶ ἐν ταῖς γραφαῖς ταῖς τῶν παρανόμων 
παράκειται κανὼν τοῦ δικαίου τουτὶ τὸ σανίδιον, καὶ τὸ ψήφισμα καὶ οἱ παραγεγραμμένοι 
νόμοι. ταῦτα συμφωνοῦντα ἀλλήλοις ἐπιδείξας κατάβαινε. Cf. 191, 192; Dem. XXIII. 
100, ror; and see Meier and Schémann 431 and notes; Gilbert, Gr. Staatsalt. 1. 
p- 284, n. 1; Thumser-Hermann, Staatsalt. § 92, ἢ. 2. 

2 This view has been defended by such passages as Poll. VIII. 56, ὑπωμοσία δέ 
ἐστιν ὅταν Tis ἢ ψήφισμα ἢ νόμον γραφέντα γράψηται ws ἀνεπιτήδειον, with VIII. 44, 
and Lycurg. Leoc. 7. Meier and Schomann refer all these to the custom of introducing 
extraneous matter into arguments on the γραφὴ παρανόμων. 

3 Aristot. Pol. Ath. 59% (see Sandys’s note); Dem. XXIV. 33 (law), ἐὰν δέ τις λύσας 
τινὰ τῶν νόμων τῶν κειμένων, ἕτερον ἀντιθῇ μὴ ἐπιτήδειον τῷ δήμῳ τῷ ᾿Αθηναίων ἢ ἐναντίον 


1 u.] THE γραφὴ παρανόμων. 323 


11. It may seem strange to compare the solemn action of the 
U.S. Supreme Court in deciding a question of constitutional law with 
the trial of a citizen at Athens, before a court consisting of 501, roo1, 
or 1501 ordinary men, chosen by lot from the great body of citizens, 
| for proposing an unconstitutional decree or law. Both courts, however, 
_ have the same solemn duty to perform, that of deciding whether a 
given enactment is or is not in conflict with a superior code. Athens, 
like the United States, assigned this duty to the highest court in her 
judicial system (to which the Areopagus hardly belonged). When we 
- leave the fundamental principle and come to the details, the differences 
_ are more striking. The most serious fault in the Athenian process was 
its personal character as a criminal suit, which any citizen could bring 
directly before the court, and the liability of the defendant to be 
| punished at the discretion of the court by a fine (sometimes set as high 
as 100 talents) or even by death. This of course embittered the whole 
| process, which sometimes degenerated into a vituperative quarrel of 
rival litigants. This evil was to a great extent removed after the expi- 
ration of a year, when the process became a sober and dignified trial of 
a legal question, the nominal defendant being now exposed to no 
_ personal risk. We may fairly compare the arguments addressed to the 
judges in such cases (as in that of Leptines), after making due allowance 
for the composition of the court, with those addressed to modern judges 

in similar cases. 

12. Another important distinction came from the great number 
and variety of the matters dealt with in the Solonic law, compared with 
the few general principles laid down in the U.S. Constitution. This 
‘multiplied the cases of conflict (real or supposed) of decrees with 
laws, and made it more difficult to avoid conflicts in proposing decrees. 
_ And many of these conflicts related far less to serious questions of law 
than to petty details of legislation. The wide range of questions with 
which the γραφὴ παρανόμων might be concerned, and the facility thus 
afforded for finding legal flaws in almost any decree, tempted un- 
principled men to use the process to vent their spite against personal 
enemies, and to stop or retard legislation which they could not otherwise 
check. We see, indeed, a decided degeneration in the conduct of this 
process from the earlier to the later cases. A brief comparison of the 
argument in these cases will illustrate this. In the years 355, 353, and 


ἔπ 


τῶν κειμένων τῳ, τὰς γραφὰς εἶναι κατ᾽ αὐτοῦ κατὰ τὸν νόμον ὃς κεῖται ἐάν τις μὴ 
ἐπιτήδειον θῇ νόμον. This law, like others in the Timocratea, is often quoted as 
authentic, and is probably so in substance: see Thumser-Hermann, Staatsalt. § g1°. 


41 -2 


324 ESSAYS. (11. 


352 B.c. Demosthenes, as counsel, composed four elaborate arguments 
against the constitutionality of two laws and two decrees. 

(1) In 356—355 B.c. Leptines carried a law providing that hereafter 
no exemption (ἀτέλεια) from any of the ordinary public burdens (ἐγκύκλιοι 
λῃτουργίαι) should be allowed, except to the descendants of Harmodius 
and Aristogiton. This law was indicted by the γραφὴ παρανόμων as 
soon as it was enacted, and its operation was suspended. ‘The chief 
accuser Bathippus died, and the case went over into the following 
year (355—-354), when Leptines was free from personal responsibility’. 
There were now two prosecutors, Apsephion, son of Bathippus, and 
Ctesippus, son of the general Chabrias. Demosthenes made his argu- 
ment against the law as the representative (συνήγορος) of Ctesippus*. 
His speech is a devtepoAoyia, Phormio, the advocate of Apsephion, as 
the elder man (or the advocate of the elder prosecutor) having spoken 
first: this accounts for the brevity with which Demosthenes speaks on 
some legal points which Phormio had probably dwelt upon. Demos- 
thenes urges the following legal points * :— 

(a) The formalities for enacting a law required by the Solonic law 
(§ 2 above) were not observed by Leptines. 

(b) The Solonic law requires that all gifts made by the people shall 
remain valid (τὰς δωρειὰς ὅσας ὃ δῆμος ἔδωκε κυρίας εἶναι). 

(c) The decree of Diophantus (passed in 411), which was solemnly 
ratified by the oath of the people and inscribed on a column, provided 
that all who should fall in defending the democratic government 
against tyrants should receive, for themselves and their descendants, the 
same honours which were given to Harmodius and Aristogiton. 


(2) Many foreign benefactors of the state will be defrauded of their 
promised rewards. 


(Ὁ) While the law allows only one penalty to be imposed by a court 
for a single offence, Leptines imposes two, and even three‘. 


(2) In 355 B.c, before the case of Leptines was tried, Demos- 
thenes composed his speech against Androtion for a client, Diodorus, to 


1 This appears in the title of the speech of Demosthenes, πρὸς Λεπτίνην, not kara 
Aemtivov. See Meier and Schomann, p. 203. 

2 For a discussion of this point see Sandys’s Leptines, pp. xxiv., xxviii. Cf. Dion. — 
Hal. ad Amm. I. 4, p. 724, ὁ περὶ τῶν ἀτελειῶν, dv αὐτὸς διέθετο. 

3 I confine myself to the chief legal arguments. 

+ On the last argument see Sandys’s note on § 156, with the quotations from 
Westermann and Dareste. Arguments (c) and (d) probably relate to the same law 
with (0). 


11. | THE γραφὴ παρανόμων. 325 


deliver. Euctemon and Diodorus indicted as illegal a decree of the 
people proposed by Androtion, by which the usual complimentary crown 
was given to the Senate of the previous year. This speech also is a 
δευτερολογία. The legal arguments are these :— 


(a) ‘The law allows the people to give the crown to the Senate only 
when the Senate has voted to build a certain number of triremes during 
the year ; this has not been done by the Senate of the previous year. 


~ (6) The decree of Androtion is ἀπροβούλευτον, le. it has not passed 
the Senate. To the natural reply, that the law permits the crown to be 
given directly by the people without an express vote of the Senate, it is 
rejoined, that the law in question permits the people to confer the crown 
only on one condition, which has not been complied with; therefore the 
_ decree of the people is doubly illegal. 
(c) Androtion is declared to be one of the class known to the law 
as οἱ αἰσχρῶς βεβιωκότες, who are forbidden to speak in the Assembly ; 
therefore his decree is illegal. 

(4) ‘The father of Androtion is said to have died in debt to the 
state, and therefore to have been ἄτιμος. This ἀτιμία descends to his son, 
who, as the debt is not yet paid, has no right to speak in the Assembly. 


. (3) In the first Assembly of 353—352 B.c., when the regular 
᾿ ἐπιχειροτονία τῶν νόμων took place, it was voted that a special board of 
νομοθέται should meet the next day to devise means for celebrating 
the coming Panathenaic festival. ‘Timocrates appeared before this 
‘board and proposed a new law, enacting that if any public debtor “as 
been or shall hereafter be condemned to imprisonment as an additional 
punishment (προστίμημα), he shall be released on giving security satis- 
factory to the people for the payment of his debt. (The object of this 
_ was to release Androtion and other friends from arrest.) The νομοθέται 
‘approved this law, which was soon indicted by Diodorus, the former 
_ opponent of Androtion, who delivered the speech written for him by 
_ Demosthenes (xxIv., against Timocrates). The law was charged with 
illegality, chiefly on the following grounds :— | 

᾿ς (a) It was passed in defiance of all the prescribed forms. 


ὦ) It was an ex post facto law, including persons already condemned 
by the courts. | , 

ο΄ (ὦ ‘It violated a law which forbade any one even to propose to 

relieve a public debtor or other ἄτιμος from his disabilities unless he 

had permission granted him by at least 6000 affirmative votes in the 

_ Assembly. 


326 ESSAYS. [π. 


(4) ‘The law forbids any one to petition the Senate or the Assembly 
to take action on any case which a court has decided; but ‘Timocrates 
proposes to require the Assembly to act in such cases even without 
a petition. 

(ec) The law of Timocrates creates a privilegium, as it grants 
privileges to some but excludes others, which the Solonic law forbids. 


(4) In 352 8.c. Demosthenes wrote a speech for Euthycles, who 
indicted a decree of Aristocrates, providing that any one who killed the 
general of -mercenaries and freebooter, Charidemus, should be outlawed 
(ἀγώγιμος) in all the dominions of Athens. The legal argument here 
(18—g4) is especially important. The orator quotes the greater part 
of the Draconic law of homicide, expounding it carefully, and showing 
how the bill of Aristocrates violates it in almost every particular. 
We learn from this argument that the Draconic law dealt chiefly with 
provisions for protecting the homicide from the earlier outlawry, which 
Aristocrates now proposed to re-establish legally, and for bringing him 
under the jurisdiction of courts and the protection of the law. 

When we come from these legal arguments to the speech of 
Aeschines against Ctesiphon, we are struck at once, in the greater part 
of it, by the almost total absence of all that makes the γραφὴ παρανόμων 
worthy of its name. Aeschines devotes less than a tenth of his speech 
to a strictly legal argument, that on the responsibility of Demosthenes 
as a magistrate; this is the strongest (though also the smallest) point in 
his argument, and he elaborates it with great skill and cogent reasoning. 
He also speaks more briefly of another legal point, the question of the 
place of proclamation ; but this concerns a law of which we have little 
knowledge. The greater part of the speech is taken up with a most 
absurd attempt to connect his general account of the public life and the 
character of Demosthenes with his legal argument. He charges the 
references to Demosthenes in Ctesiphon’s decree, in which he is said 
to seek the best interests of Athens in all that he says and does, with 
violating the law forbidding the falsification of the public records! This 
is his most elaborate argument, the one on which he most depends. 
It is absurd to suppose that the law in question had any reference to a | 
case like this: this would have exposed every personal compliment in 
a laudatory decree to public prosecution at any one’s will. It clearly 
related to malicious and fraudulent falsification of the public records in 
the Metroum by adding, erasing, or changing. And yet this is brought 
forward soberly and earnestly by Aeschines as a legal argument in 
support of his indictment. Of course Demosthenes, as the defendant’s 


" 


Ε΄, 11] HL SUIT AGAINST CTESIPHON. 327 


advocate, was bound to reply to the plaintiff’s argument, so that we 
cannot fairly compare his later with his earlier treatment of the γραφὴ 
παρανόμων. But the case against Ctesiphon, as Aeschines presents it, is 
in striking contrast to the cases against Leptines and others as Demos- 
thenes presents them. 

‘13. Finally, there was a law providing that any one who was 
thrice condemned in the γραφὴ παρανόμων should forfeit the right to 


_ propose measures in the Senate or Assembly. 


111. 


The Suit against Ctesiphon. 


1. Late in the month Thargelion of the year of Chaerondas (June, 
337 B.C.) Demosthenes proposed and carried a measure for permanent 
repairs of the walls of Athens. The hasty work done under the excite- 


ment of the defeat at Chaeronea earlier in the year had been only 


temporary’. A commission of ten τειχοποιοί, one to be appointed by 
each tribe, was now established, to hold office during the following year, 
that of Phrynichus, 337—336 B.c. Demosthenes was chosen by his 
own tribe, the Pandionis, to be one of this commission. The fortifications 
of the Piraeus were assigned him as his special charge, and he is said to 
have received ten talents from the state to be used in the work. He 
added to this sum a substantial amount on his own account, usually 
stated as a hundred minas (12 talents)". He also held the important 
office of superintendent of the Theoric Fund, which Aeschines says 


39) 


at that time included “nearly the whole administration of the state”. 


1 Aesch. III. 27: this shows that the ten τειχοποιοί were to be chosen in the last 
month of Chaerondas (338—337), to serve during the following year. As Ctesiphon’s 
bill proposed to crown Demosthenes during his year of office, and as the bill was 
indicted shortly after it passed the Senate, the bill and the indictment belong to the 


_ year of Phrynichus (337—336). This agrees with the statement of Aeschines (219) 


that he brought the indictment before Philip’s death (summer of 336), and with other 
data. See note 2, p. 329. The spurious indictment and decree (Dem. Cor. 54, 118) 
give two wrong names for the archon. 

2 Aesch. III. 17, 23, 31; Dem. Cor. 113, 300 (τὸν κύκλον τοῦ Πειραιῶς) ; Vit. Χ. 
Orat. 845 F; and 851A (decree), δύο τάφρους περὶ τὸν Πειραιᾷ ταφρεύσας, but stating 
the amount given as three talents. See a decree for repairing the walls, passed a few 


_ years later, in C. I. Att. 11. no. 167. 


® Aesch. 111. 25, 26. 


328 ESSAYS. [1π. 


It was gratitude for his great public services in these offices and for iis 
generous gift, together with the increasing confidence in his statesmanship 
and patriotism, which had recently been expressed in his appointment 
to deliver the funeral oration on those who fell at Chaeronea 1, that caused 
his political friends to propose to crown him in the theatre at the Great 
Dionysia in the spring of 336, as a mark of the public approbation of 
his whole political life’. | . 

2. Ctesiphon accordingly proposed a bill in the Senate to crown 
Demosthenes with a golden crown for his services and generosity as 
commissioner on the walls and for his life devoted to the interests of 
Athens in speech and action. The bill passed the Senate at once, and 
there can be little doubt that it would have passed the Assembly with 
equal alacrity if it could have been brought to a vote there. Before it 
, could be presented to the people, Aeschines brought a γραφὴ παρανόμων 
against Ctesiphon, charging his bill with illegality. This made it 
impossible to carry the measure further until the lawsuit was settled®. 
For reasons of which we are not directly informed, but in which 
both Aeschines and Ctesiphon as well as Demosthenes must have 
acquiesced the trial was postponed more than six years, until August 
330. We can easily conjecture reasons for this long delay. Soon after 
the suit was brought, Philip was assassinated, and Alexander came to 
the throne. Uncertainty as to the effect of this sudden change, and 
unwillingness to discuss publicly the relations between Philip and 
Athens, probably made both parties not averse to remaining quiet. 
The destruction of Thebes in the following year and the subsequent 
harsh action of Alexander, especially his demand for the Athenian 
orators, while they emboldened the Macedonian party at Athens, yet 
made Demosthenes safer against an adverse judgment of his fellow 
citizens than ever before. Aeschines doubtless felt that he had gained 
a great point in preventing Demosthenes from being publicly crowned 
before the assembled Greeks, and was willing to wait. 

3. A year later Alexander began his invasion of the Persian 
Empire. The absence from Greece of the man whom one party feared 
and the other was eager to conciliate might seem favourable to a 


1 Dem. Cor. 285. . 

* As the bill of Ctesiphon was proposed in 337—336, we may assume that 
Demosthenes was to be crowned at the Great Dionysia of that year. 

Ὁ Dem. [XxvI.] 8: ὅταν τις ψηφίσματος ἢ νόμου γραφὴν ἀπενέγκῃ πρὸς τοὺς θεσμο- 
θέτας, ὁ μὲν νόμος ἢ τὸ ψήφισμα ἄκυρόν ἐστιν. See Poll. vir. 56. This applies even 
more strongly to a προβούλευμα, 


ua] THE SUIT AGAINST CTESIPHON. 329 


renewal of the contest ; but a case already postponed two years needed 
some special occasion to revive it. Such an occasion came, as 
Aeschines probably thought, with the destruction of the Persian Empire 
after the battle of Arbela (Oct. 1, 331 8.c.)', when Darius was a fugitive 
and Alexander was at the summit of his glory. He must have felt that 
no time could be more favourable for a judgment against Demosthenes; 
while Demosthenes naturally felt that shrinking from the trial would 
imply want of confidence in the good-will of his fellow citizens, of which 
_he was constantly receiving most flattering tokens. For these or other 
reasons, this famous case came before the Heliastic court, under the 
presidency of the six Thesmothetae, in the late summer, probably in 
August, 330 B.C.” We do not know the number of the judges. A 
δικαστήριον commonly consisted of 501; but we hear of too1, 1501, 
and 2001, and in so important a case one of the larger courts would be 
likely to be impanelled. 

4. The προβούλευμα of the Senate concerning the crown had legally 
expired at the end of the year 337—336°. This was probably not 
renewed until after the trial. The offence for which Ctesiphon was 
indicted was committed when he proposed his bill in 336, and this 
offence was in no way mitigated by the subsequent expiration of the act 
of the Senate. A renewal of the same decree would probably have 
been illegal while it was suspended under indictment ; the proposal of 
a new decree in a different form would have required a new indictment 


1 Plutarch (Alex. 31) says that the battle of Arbela was fought eleven days after 
an eclipse of the moon: this occurred Sept. 20, 331 B.c. See Boeckh, Mondcyclen, 
PP: 41, 42. 

* We have several independent data which fix this time. (1) See Dion. Hal. ad 
Amm. I. 12 (p. 746): οὗτος (the speech on the Crown) yap μόνος εἰς δικαστήριον 
εἰσελήλυθεν μετὰ τὸν πόλεμον (the campaign of Chaeronea), ἐπ᾽ ᾿Αριστοφῶντος ἄρχοντος 
(330—329), ὀγδόῳ μὲν ἐνιαυτῷ μετὰ τὴν ἐν Χαιρωνείᾳ μάχην (338), ἕκτῳ δὲ μετὰ τὴν 
Φιλίππου τελευτὴν (336), καθ᾽ ὃν χρόνον ᾿Αλέξανδρος τὴν ἐν ᾿Αρβήλοις ἐνίκα μάχην. 
This places the date after midsummer 330 8.c. (See Schaefer 111. p. 224, note.) 
_ (2) The year 330—329 began June 28 (Boeckh, Mondcyclen, p. 42). The death of 
_ Darius occurred in Hecatombaeon (i.e. July) of this year: Arrian 111. 227. The news 
of this had not come to Athens before the trial, as Aeschines (132) speaks of him 
asa fugitive. This would not allow the trial to be later than August. (3) Again, 
Aeschines (254) says, ἡμερών μὲν ὀλίγων μέλλει τὰ Πύθια γίγνεσθαι. The Pythian 
games came in the third year of each Olympiad near the end of the Delphic 
month Bovxdrios, which corresponds to the second month of the Attic year (Meta- 
_ geitnion). This would place the trial near the middle of August. See Unger, 
_ Sitzungsberichte of the Munich Academy, 1879, 11. p. 177; Kohler’s remarks on 
Seebewatt. ΤΙ. NOS. 545, 551. 

* Dem. XXIII. 92: ὁ νόμος δ᾽ ἐπέτεια κελεύει TA τῆς βουλῆς εἶναι ψηφίσματα. 


330 ' ESSAYS. (111. 


to prevent it from being carried to the Assembly and passed like any 
other προβούλευμα. ‘The long-delayed trial brought to Athens great 
numbers of visitors from all parts of Greece, who were eager to witness 
this final contest between the rival orators. The audience of citizens 
and strangers which surrounded the court probably differed little from 
that which would have greeted Demosthenes in the Dionysiac theatre if 
his crown had then been proclaimed. It can hardly be doubted that 
the crowd of listeners were as deeply moved by the earnest eloquence 
of Demosthenes as the judges, and that they would gladly have followed 
the court in giving him more than four-fifths of their votes. 

5. The day was divided into three parts, as was usual on the trial 
of a γραφὴ παρανόμων, an equal amount of water being poured into the 
clepsydra for the plaintiff'and the defendant, and a third (a smaller 
amount) in case of the conviction of the defendant, for the assessment 
of the penalty (τίμησις). The largest amount of water which is men- 
tioned is that assigned to each plea in the γραφῇ παραπρεσβείας (τι 
ἀμφορεῖς, about 100 gallons), and this is probably the maximum®. The 
speech of Demosthenes against Aeschines in this suit (xIx.) is the longest 
that we have. That on the Crown is much shorter, but longer than any 
of the others delivered in a γραφὴ παρανόμων : we may presume that the 
orator here used all of his time. Aeschines, as plaintiff, spoke first ; 
after his argument, the court called on Ctesiphon, as defendant, to reply. 
He probably repeated a short speech composed for him by Demos- 
thenes, and then asked leave of the court to call on Demosthenes, as 
his advocate, to finish his defence*. Strictly, each party to the suit was 
required to plead his own cause; or, if he called in advocates, as 
Aeschines summoned Eubulus, Phocion, and others to support him in 
the suit for false legation, to do this at the end of an elaborate argument 
of his own’. But here, as Demosthenes was the real defendant, it would 
have been absurd to object to his arguing the case in full. That the 
procedure was unusual is shown by the audacious attempt of Aeschines 
to induce the court to refuse Demosthenes a hearing’; and his argument 


1 Aesch. IIL. 56: ἐναντίον τῶν δικαστῶν καὶ τῶν ἄλλων πολιτῶν, καὶ τῶν Ἑλλήνων. 
.. 6p δὲ οὐκ ὀλίγους παρόντας, ἀλλ᾽ ὅσους οὐδεὶς πώποτε μέμνηται πρὸς ἀγῶνα δημόσιον 
παραγενομένους. 

2 Id. 197; Harpocration under διαμεμετρημένη ἡμέρα. 

3 Τά. 11. 126: πρὸς ἕνδεκα γὰρ ἀμφορέας ἐν διαμεμετρημένῃ τῇ ἡμέρᾳ κρίνομαι. 

4 Id. ΠΙ. 201: ἐπειδὰν προελθὼν ἐνταυθοῖ Κτησιφῶν διεξέλθῃ πρὸς ὑμᾶς τοῦτο δὴ τὸ 
συντεταγμένον αὐτῷ προοίμιον. 

ἘΣΤΟΝ τι" χ8η- 

6 Id. 11. 202---205. 


ΤῊ oe THE SUIT AGAINST CTESIPHON. 331 


on this point shows that the court had a legal right to refuse to hear any 
except the parties to the suit. But the great audience had not come to 
hear Ctesiphon, and we hear of no further attempt to interfere with the 
argument of Demosthenes. The orator probably delivered his famous 
speech substantially in the form in which it has come down to us’. | 

6. When the arguments were finished, the judges voted on the 
question of convicting Ctesiphon; and the result was a triumphant 
acquittal by more than four-fifths of the votes*. This subjected 
__Aeschines to the two penalties of malicious prosecution, a fine of a 
thousand drachmas, and partial ἀτιμία, which deprived him of the nght 
to bring a similar suit hereafter*. This result mortified him so deeply 
that he withdrew from Athens and spent the rest of his life chiefly in 


1 The speech of Demosthenes is universally praised as a consummate work of art. 
When we think of the tremendous stake which he had at risk in the case, and 
remember that he had six years’ warning of the crisis which was sure to come sooner 
or later, it seems incredible that he should have left the elaboration of his speech to 
‘any extent to future revision. In the speech of Aeschines there are such definite 
allusions to passages in the reply of Demosthenes, that we cannot escape the con- 

clusion that they are later additions. There is nothing in the speech of Demosthenes 
_ which is impossible or even strange ina reply. I have tried to show that what has 
᾿ sometimes been mistaken for confusion in the narrative part of his speech is really the 
result of the highest art in the arrangement of his argument (see Essay I. § 4, p. 310). 

2 Plut. Dem. 24: οὕτω λαμπρῶς ἀπέλυσαν ὥστε τὸ πέμπτον μέρος τῶν ψήφων 
Αἰσχίνην μὴ μεταλαβεῖν. Cf. Dem. Cor. 82, 266. 

3 Harpocr. under ἐάν τις: ἐάν τις γραψάμενος μὴ μεταλάβῃ τὸ πέμπτον μέρος τῶν 
ψήφων, ὀφλισκάνει χιλίας καὶ πρόσεστιν ἀτιμία τις. Theophrastus (in Schol. to Dem. 
p- 593; 24 R.) adds to this (explaining ἀτιμία) οἷον τὸ ἐξεῖναι μήτε γράψασθαι παρα- 
ο΄ γόμων μήτε φαίνειν μήτε ἐφηγεῖσθαι. Cf. Poll. ΝΠ. 53. Philostr. Vit. Soph. 1. 18, 3: 
᾿Αθηνῶν δ᾽ ὑπεξῆλθεν (Αἰσχίνης) οὐχὶ φεύγειν προσταχθεὶς, ἀλλ᾽ ἀτιμίᾳ ἐξιστάμενος, 
ἣ ὑπήγετο ὑπὸ Δημοσθένει καὶ Κτησιφῶντι ἐκπεσὼν τῶν ψήφων. The precise nature 
of the partial ἀτιμία here mentioned is uncertain. The above quotation from 
Theophrastus would seem to imply that it consisted in the loss of the right to bring 
the special form of γραφή in which he was defeated, as γραφὴ παρανόμων, γραφὴ 
παραπρεσβείας, or any of the peculiar forms (like φάσις, εἰσαγγελία, ἔνδειξις, etc.) 
which are classed with γραφαί (see Poll. ν1Π. 40, 41). But see Andoc. 1. 76, ἑτέροις 
οὐκ ἢν γράψασθαι, τοῖς δὲ ἐνδεῖξαι, where γράψασθαι would seem to include all γραφαί. 
_ The same view is supported by [Dem.] XxVI. 9, ὅταν τις ἐπεξιὼν μὴ μεταλάβῃ τὸ 
_ πέμπτον μέρος τῶν ψήφων, ἐφ᾽ οἷς οἱ νόμοι κελεύουσι TO λοιπὸν μὴ γράφεσθαι μηδ᾽ 
ἀπάγειν μηδ᾽ ἐφηγεῖσθαι. On the whole, I am inclined to think that Theophrastus 
is more exact in his expression γράψασθαι rapavéuwy, and that a similar qualification 
is implied in the other passages, so that the ἄτιμος would forfeit his right to bring the 
same form of γραφή in which he was defeated. Otherwise a plaintiff who failed to 
receive a fifth of the votes in the smallest kind of γραφή would lose the right to bring’ 
all γραφαί, while one who lost an ἔνδειξις or an εἰσαγγελία would lose only the right 
to bring this unusual form of public suit. 


332 ESSAYS. [rv. 


Rhodes, where he is said to have been a teacher of rhetoric in his later 
years’. After such a decisive vindication of Demosthenes, there can be 
no doubt that his friends renewed in the Senate the bill for crowning 
him, and that this was promptly passed in both Senate and Assembly 
in time for the orator to receive his golden crown with enthusiastic 
applause at the Great Dionysia of 329. 


IV, 


The trials of Aeschines and Philocrates for misconduct in 
making the Peace of 346 B.C. 


1. The trial of Aeschines in 343 B.c.? for his conduct on the Second 
Embassy, which negotiated the peace with Philip in 346, and the speech 
of Demosthenes as his accuser, have an important bearing on the dis- 
cussions of the peace in the orations of Aeschines and Demosthenes 
thirteen years later. The suit against Aeschines was technically called 
εὔθυναι, 1.6. a process arising from the εὔθυναι or scrutiny which 
Aeschines, like every other officer of state, was required to pass before 
he could be relieved of his responsibility as an ambassador®, Within 


' Plut. Dem. 24: εὐθὺς ἐκ τῆς πόλεως ᾧχετ᾽ ἀπιὼν, καὶ περὶ Ῥόδον καὶ ᾿Ιωνίαν 
σοφιστεύων κατεβίωσε. Vit. X. Orat. 840 Ὁ: ἀπάρας εἰς τὴν Ῥόδον, ἐνταῦθα σχολὴν 
καταστησάμενος ἐδίδασκεν. While teaching at Rhodes, Aeschines is said to have read 
his speech against Ctesiphon to a Rhodian audience; and when all were astonished 
that he was defeated after so eloquent a plea, he replied, οὐκ ἂν ἐθαυμάζετε, Ῥόδιοι, ef 
πρὸς ταῦτα Δημοσθένους λέγοντος ἠκούσατε. Vit. X. Orat. ibid. Other versions of the 
story give his answer, εἰ ἠκούσατε τοῦ θηρίου ἐκείνου, οὐκ ἂν ὑμῖν τοῦτο ἠπόρητο. 
See Phot. Bibl. No. 61. Roman writers, as Cicero (de Orat. m1. 56), relate that 
the Khodians, after hearing the speech of Aeschines, asked to hear the reply of 
Demosthenes: quam cum suavissima et maxima voce legisset, admirantibus omnibus, 
“Quanto,” inquit, ‘‘ magis miraremini'si audissetis ipsum !” 

* Dionys. ad Amm. I. 10 (p. 737), under the archonship of Pythodotus (343—342) : 
καὶ τὸν κατ᾽ Αἰσχίνου συνετάξατο λόγον, ὅτε τὰς εὐθύνας ἐδίδου τῆς δευτέρας πρεσβείας 
τῆς ἐπὶ τοὺς ὅρκους. Hypoth. 2, § 11, to Dem. ΧΙΧ.: μαθόντες οἱ ᾿Αθηναῖοι τὴν τῶν 
Φωκέων ἀπώλειαν,... μετὰ τρία ἔτη εἰσῆλθεν ὁ Δημοσθένης κατηγορήσων Αἰσχίνου. See 
Schaefer 11. 383. It has often been doubted whether the case ever came to trial, 
chiefly because of a doubt of Plutarch (Dem. 15), ὁ δὲ κατ᾽ Αἰσχίνου τῆς παραπρεσβείας 
ἄδηλον εἰ λέλεκται" καίτοι φησὶν ᾿Ιδομενεὺς παρὰ τριάκοντα μόνας τὸν Αἰσχίνην ἀπο- 
φυγεῖν. For Plutarch’s objection, that neither orator mentions the trial in the 
speeches on the Crown, see note on Cor. 1425. See also note 6, 8 7, Pp. 337- 

Ὁ For εὔθυναι, as a form of legal process, see Meier and Schémann, pp. 257—269. 


1ν}] TRIALS OF PHILOCRATES AND AESCHINES. 333 


thirty days after the return of the. second embassy to Athens (13 
Scirophorion, 7 July, 346), Aeschines must have presented himself for 
his εὔθυναι. Before this, when Demosthenes offered himself for his 
εὔθυναι, Aeschines had objected to the process, on the ground that the 
second embassy was merely a continuation of the first, for which all the 
| envoys had already passed the scrutiny. Of course this was a mere trick 
to escape passing his own εὔθυναι for the second embassy, which he had 
good reason to dread. This objection was overruled by the presiding 
_Logistae; and as Demosthenes was admitted to his εὔθυναι, Aeschines 
also was compelled to appear for his own’. 

2. Demosthenes and Timarchus, with perhaps others, appeared 
against Aeschines at his εὔθυναι with a γραφὴ παραπρεσβείας, an tndict- 
ment for misconduct on an embassy*, This was received by the presiding 
Logistae, who had the presidency also in this suit; and the case would 
naturally have been brought by them before a Heliastic court. But 
before this could be done, Aeschines met the accusation by a most 
effective ἀντιγραφή, in which he challenged the right of Timarchus to 
appear as an accuser in the courts, on the ground that he had once led 
a shameless life (αἰσχρῶς βεβιωκέναι). When next he saw Timarchus in 
the Assembly, he served upon him publicly an ἐπαγγελία δοκιμασίας, i.e. 
a summons to appear at a δοκιμασία ῥητόρων, an investigation of his 
right to appear as a ῥήτωρ. He charged him with ἑταίρησις and also 
with squandering his paternal estate, both of which disqualified a man 
from appearing as a speaker in either the Assembly or the courts of law. 
This case came to trial early in 345 B.c.’, and the evidence against 


Any suit which arose from charges made at the εὔθυναι was called εὔθυναι: see Dem. 
XIX. 17, ἐκ THs πρεσβείας ταύτης, ἧσπερ εἰσὶν ai νῦν εὔθυναι, and 82, 132, 256. See 
note on Cor. 249°. 

1 Harpocr. under λογισταί. 

* Dem. XIX. 211,212. 

8 Hypoth. 2, ὃ ro, to Dem. XIX.: ἐπέστη Τίμαρχος καὶ Δημοσθένης κατηγορήσοντες 
τούτου. For the γραφὴ παραπρεσβείας, which was regularly brought only at the 
εὔθυναι, see Meier and Schoémann, pp. 459—461. 

4 Aesch. I. 19, 20, 28—32: τίνας δ᾽ οὐκ wero δεῖν λέγειν ; τοὺς αἰσχρῶς βεβιωκότας" 
τούτους οὐκ ἐᾷ δημηγορεῖν. ...δοκιμασία ῥητόρων, ἐάν τις λέγῃ ἐν τῷ δήμῳ τὸν πατέρα 
τύπτων ἢ τὴν μητέρα...ἢ πεπορνευμένος ἢ ἡταιρηκὼς,...ἢ τὰ πατρῷα κατεδηδοκώς. 
Cf. 154. For the ἐπαγγελία δοκιμασίας see Meier and Schémann, pp. 249—252. 
There were two kinds of δοκιμασία which might lead to a judicial process, which was 
itself called δοκιμασία (cf. the parallel case of εὔθυναι in note 3, p. 332): these were 
- the δοκιμασία ἀρχόντων (M. and S. pp. 236—246), and the δοκιμασία ῥητόρων, to which 
Timarchus was subjected. , 

5 66 ochaefer 11. 336, n. 5. 


334 ESSAYS. [1v. 


Timarchus was ample for his conviction. Aeschines then delivered the 
first of his three orations, and it is doubtful whether any serious defence 
was made. This had the result desired by him. It suspended the 


case against himself for a time; and by disgracefully disqualifying one 


of his accusers, discredited the case in the eyes of the people, who 
would finally decide it in the popular court. It is hard to see why such 
a man as Timarchus was allowed to be associated with Demosthenes in 
so important a political case, and it soon appeared that this was a most 
fatal mistake’. 

3. This mortifying rebuff put off the trial more than two years. It 
is easy to see why Demosthenes hesitated to renew the prosecution, and 
Aeschines probably felt that time would be on his side. In the mean- 
time Demosthenes lost no opportunity of discrediting the peace in the 
Assembly and of declaring that Philip had deceived Athens by bribing 
certain men who were well known in the city. The etiquette of the 
Assembly forbade the mention of names; but no names could have 
designated more clearly both Aeschines and Philocrates?. Such con- 
stant reminders, confirmed by the later acts of Philip, must have 
gradually brought the Athenians to a correct understanding of the 
conduct of Aeschines. The friends of Demosthenes prepared the way 
for a renewal of his suit against Aeschines, by a state prosecution of 
Philocrates for treasonable conduct in negotiating the peace which bore 
his name. 

4. Early in 343 B.c. Hyperides brought before the Senate of Five 


* The insignificance of Timarchus will hardly account for his appearance as 
prosecutor in this case; for Demosthenes would represent the suit publicly, whoever 
were his associates. Timarchus had been a strong and active opponent of Philip. 
As Senator in 347—346, he proposed a decree that any one who should be convicted 
of carrying arms or naval implements to Philip should be punished by death (Dem. 
XIX. 286). It must also be remembered that the charges against Timarchus related 
to his youth and were probably forgotten by most people. He was a Senator in 361, 
and therefore at least thirty years old then, so that in 345 he was at least forty-six. 
It is to be noticed that Aeschines makes the venality of the offence his sole ground for 
his accusation of Timarchus: he even confesses that apart from this he has no 
objection to the relation in question. See 1. 137, τὸ μὲν ἀδιαφθόρως ἐρᾶσθαί φημι 
καλὸν εἶναι, τὸ δ᾽ ἐπαρθέντα μισθῷ πεπορνεῦσθαι αἰσχρόν (cf. 136). The whole passage 
I. 132165 gives a striking view of what it was safe for an orator to say in public, 
even in attacking a man like Timarchus. See Schaefer 11. 338—340, and Dem. 
xIx. 280. 

* See Dem. vi. 28—37, ΙΧ. 36—40; even in his speech on the Peace, v. 9, 10, 
he shows plainly who are responsible for the present necessity of submitting to Philip’s 
demands. See also XIX. 134-136, 207. 


ee rt 


αν} ZRIALS OF PHILOCRATES AND AESCHINES. 335 


Hundred an εἰσαγγελία against Philocrates, charging him with serving 
Philip for bribes to the detriment of Athens. The Senate accepted the 
εἰσαγγελία, thus making the suit a public one. It went for trial to 
a Heliastic court, and the state appointed advocates, among them 
Demosthenes, to assist Hyperides in managing the case’. In his- 
indictment (called εἰσαγγελία) Hyperides quoted verbatim five or six 
decrees of Philocrates in support of his charge*. There was no lack of 
decisive evidence. Philocrates had made an open show of his newly 
acquired wealth after the peace, by building houses, selling wheat, 
_ transporting timber, changing foreign gold openly at the bankers’ 
counters in Athens; and (according to Demosthenes) he had even con- 
fessed that he received money from Philip*. He gave up his defence, and 
left the court and Athens before the judgment was declared ; and in his 
absence he was condemned to death, the penalty which Hyperides 
proposed in his εἰσαγγελία. He passed the rest of his life in exile‘. 
This result shows how public opinion about the peace had changed in 
three years, so that Philocrates, whose word was law when the peace 
was made, was now left to his fate, friendless and helpless. No man of 
influence, like Eubulus, attempted to save him; and we hear of no 


1 For the state process called εἰσαγγελία, see Meier and Schomann, pp. 312—332, 
and. for the νόμος εἰσαγγελτικός, p. 316. This process was provided for the special 
trial of (1) those charged with conspiracy against the democracy of Athens, (2) those 
charged with betraying towns or military or naval forces to public enemies, or with 
holding treasonable communication with these, (3) orators (ῥήτορας) charged with 
being bribed by public enemies to give evil advice to the people. See Hyper. Eux. 
88 7, 8 (coll. 22, 23). It will be seen that εἰσαγγελία, so far from being applicable 
chiefly (or only) to crimes which were not provided for in the laws (as was once 
believed), is definitely restricted to certain high offences, all of which, moreover, might 
be dealt with by other processes, as is seen in the similar cases of Philocrates and 
Aeschines. 

2 Hyper. Eux. §§ 29, 30 (coll. 39, 40): τοῦτον (Φιλοκράτη) εἰσαγγείλας ἐγὼ ὑπὲρ ὧν 
Φιλίππῳ ὑπηρέτει κατὰ τῆς πόλεως, εἷλον ἐν τῷ δικαστηρίῳ, Kal τὴν εἰσαγγελίαν ἔγραψα 
δικαίαν καὶ ὥσπερ ὁ νόμος κελεύει, ῥήτορα ὄντα λέγειν μὴ τὰ ἄριστα τῷ δήμῳ τῷ 
᾿Αθηναίων χρήματα λαμβάνοντα καὶ δωρεὰς παρὰ τῶν τἀναντία πραττόντων 
τῷ δήμῳ (quoting the law). καὶ οὐδ᾽ οὕτως ἀπέχρησέ μοι τὴν εἰσαγγελίαν δοῦναι, 
ἀλλ᾽ ὑποκάτω παρέγραψα, τάδ᾽ εἶπεν οὐ τὰ ἄριστα τῷ δήμῳ, χρήματα λαβών" 
εἶτα τὸ ψήφισμα αὐτοῦ ὑπέγραψα" καὶ πάλιν τάδ᾽ εἷπεν οὐ τὰ ἄριστα τῷ δήμῳ, 
χρήματα λαβὼν, καὶ τὸ ψήφισμα παρέγραφον. καὶ ἔστι μοι πεντάκις ἢ ἑξάκις τοῦτο 
γεγραμμένον. This will give some idea of the formalities observed in the εἰσαγγελία. 
3 Dem. ΧΙΧ. 114: εἰ μὴ μόνον ὡμολόγει map ὑμῖν ἐν τῷ δήμῳ πολλάκις, ἀλλὰ Kal 
ἐδείκνυεν ὑμῖν, πυροπωλῶν, οἰκοδομῶν,.. ξυληγῶν, τὸ χρυσίον καταλλαττόμενος φανερῶς 
ἐπὶ ταῖς τραπέζαις. Gold coins in Athens were generally foreign. 

+ Aesch. II. 6, 111. 79, 81; Dinarch. 1. 28. 


336 ESSAYS. [IVv. 


anxiety lest his condemnation should cause enmity with Philip. Demos- 
thenes, as prosecuting attorney for the state, complained that Philocrates 
alone was selected for prosecution while others equally guilty were left 
untouched. He then formally called on “any of the other ambassadors,” 
who would declare before the court that he was not implicated in the 
acts of Philocrates, to come forward and do so; and he promised to 
absolve him from accusation. No one responded’. This was of course 
an offer to Aeschines to abandon the suit against him if he would make 
this declaration. Such challenges were very frequent in the courts of 
Athens, chiefly because they were never meant to be accepted. 

5. This triumphant success inspired Demosthenes with new hopes 
for his suit against Aeschines. This came to trial after midsummer in 
343 B.c. when Demosthenes and Aeschines delivered their speeches περὶ 


_ τῆς παραπρεσβείας. The court probably consisted of 1501 judges; and 


the Logistae presided, as the case still belonged to the εὔθυναι of the 
second embassy, for which Aeschines was still ὑπεύθυνος. Demosthenes 
brings his accusation under five heads, covering the five points on which 
an ambassador should be called to account at his εὔθυναι. These are 
(1) dv ἀπήγγειλε, (2) dv ἔπεισε, (3) ὧν προσετάξετε αὐτῷ, (4) τῶν χρόνων, 
(5) εἰ ἀδωροδοκήτως ἢ μή (οἵ τοῦ προῖκα ἢ μή). In his elaborate argument 
he strives to prove that Aeschines (1) made a false report, (2) advocated 
pernicious measures on the ground of his report, (3) disobeyed his 
instructions, (4) wasted his time, (5) acted corruptly, being bribed by 
Philip*. The argument on these five heads occupies ὅδ 17—178, the 
remainder of the oration being chiefly given to general arguments tending 
to show the corruption of Aeschines and his collusion with Philip. One 
of the strongest general arguments is this. Events have proved that the 
account given by Aeschines of Philip’s intentions, especially his report 
that Philip would save the Phocians and attack the Thebans, was 
absolutely false, and Athens has been disgraced by following his bad 
advice. Now, if he thus reported and thus advised honestly, he must 
feel that he was grossly betrayed by Philip. No words could express his 
indignation at such base treatment. On the contrary, he still remains a 
firm friend of Philip. His report and advice were therefore dishonest 
and corrupt*. Aeschines makes no attempt to answer this argument 
and many others equally cogent. 

6. ‘The reply of Aeschines, though eloquent and effective in certain 


1 "Dem! XIX. 116-178. 
2 Ibid. 4—8, 177—179. 
3 Tbid. ro6—rto. 


Div.) ZRIALS OF PHILOCRATES AND AESCHINES. 337 


passages, is weak and trifling as an answer to the powerful argument of 
Demosthenes. ‘Though he denies some of the special statements of his 
opponent, perhaps successfully, he says nothing which breaks the force 
of the main argument against himself. His long account of the first 
embassy has nothing to do with the question before the court ; many of 
his strongest arguments relate to matters on which we have no other 
knowledge; while, in cases in which we have other evidence, we 
sometimes find his most solemn assertions false or misleading’. His 
replies to the gravest charges are sometimes mere trifling. Thus he 
answers the grave charge of falsely reporting Philip’s intentions by 
saying that he ‘‘only made a report and promised nothing*®.” He 
replies to the charge of joining Philip in the paeans and other rejoicings 
over the destruction of the Phocians by saying that, though he was 
present, he was only one of two hundred, and that Demosthenes (who 
was not present) has no evidence whether he sang or not! He then 
says that the paean was sung in honour of Apollo, not to the dishonour 
of Athens; and seems to imply that, if he only sang with the rest of the 
company, he did merely an act of piety*! 

7. He brought before the court his aged father, his two little 
children, and his two brothers, to excite pity*; and he finally called on 
Eubulus, Phocion, and other influential men to come forward as his 
supporters’. Eubulus addressed the court in his behalf, and probably 
urged prudential reasons for acquitting Aeschines. It might easily be 
thought by cautious men that the recent sacrifice of Phiiocrates was as 
much as it was safe to demand under the circumstances ; and this, added 
to the presence of men like Eubulus and Phocion on the defendant’s 
platform, probably saved Aeschines from conviction. We are told only 
that he was acquitted by thirty votes®; and this was no triumph— 
indeed, no justification—for a man in his position. 


1 See Hist. §§ 36, 37. 

* Aesch. 11. 119. The best that Aeschines could say on this subject thirteen years 
later is seen in III. 79—83. 

3 Ibid. 162, 163: e.g. καὶ τῷ γε δῆλος ἦν, εἰ μή γε ὥσπερ ἐν τοῖς χοροῖς προῇδον ; 

4 Ibid. 179, 180. 

> Ibid. 184. 

6 Vit. x. Orat. 840C: ἐφ᾽ ἣ (πρεσβείᾳ) κατηγορηθεὶς ὑπὸ Δημοσθένους,;...συνειπόντος 
αὐτῷ Εὐβούλου, ...τριάκοντα ψήφοις ἀπέφυγεν, and 841A: κυρώσας ὅρκοις τὴν εἰρήνην, 
κριθεὶς ἀπέφυγεν, ὡς προείρηται. ΠΟΘ 332, note. 2: 


338 ESSAYS. [v. 


Me 


The Constitution of the Amphictyonic Council. 


1. Aeschines (11. 116) gives eleven of the twelve tribes which 
formed the Amphictyonic Council, as follows: Thessalians, Boeotians 
(‘not merely Thebans”), Dorians, Ionians, Perrhaebians, Magnesians, 
Locrians, Oetaeans, Phthiotians (1.6. the Achaeans of Phthiotis), Malians, 
Phocians. He professes to give twelve names: κατηριθμησάμην ἔθνη 
δώδεκα τὰ μετέχοντα τοῦ ἱεροῦ. It is generally assumed that the 
Dolopians are accidentally omitted in the text, and many editions insert 
these. An important inscription recently discovered at Delphi by the 
French explorers seems to me to show clearly that the Delphians are 
the omitted people. See Bourguet, in the Bulletin de Correspondance 
Hellénique, 1896, p. 241, who gives from this inscription a list of the 
members of the Council at the time of Alexander the Great. This 
contains the Thessalians, ‘“‘King Alexander,” Delphians, Dorians, 
Ionians, Perrhaebians (with Dolopians), Boeotians, Locrians, Achaeans 
(i.e. of Phthiotis), Magnesians, Aenianians, and Malians, each with 
two delegates. Comparing this with the list of Aeschines, we find 
King Alexander holding the two Phocian votes; the Aenianians repre- 
sent the Oetaeans, of whom they were an important tribe; the 
Dolopians are included with the Perrhaebians ; and the Delphians, who 
are constantly mentioned in the Delphic inscriptions relating to the 
Council, are added. If we ish the Delphians to the list of Aeschines, 
the two lists substantially agree’. 

2. Each of the twelve tribes had two votes in the chien given 
by delegates called ἱερομνήμονες, two of whom were sent by each 
Amphictyonic tribe. But the Dorians, Ionians, and Locrians were 
geographically divided, so that each of two divisions had a single Hiero- 
mnemon with a single vote. Thus the two Dorian votes might be divided 
between the Spartans (with other Dorians of Peloponnesus) and the 
ancient Dorian Tetrapolis, near Parnassus; the Ionian votes between 


1 On the Delphians see Foucart’s note in Bull. de Corresp. Hellén., 1883, p. 437. 
Theopompus (frag. 80) gives the Dolopians and Achaeans, as independent of Perrhae- 
bians and Phthiotians (who are also given) ; and he omits the Thessalians and Locrians. 

_Pausanias (x. 8, 2) gives only ten names, omitting the Delphians and Boeotians: he 
gives the Phocians (and no Macedonians), otherwise agreeing essentially with the 
Delphic inscription. 


Pav] THE AMPHICTYONIC COUNCIL. 339 


the Athenians and the other Ionians (in Euboea and Asia Minor); the 
Locrian votes between the Eastern and Western Locrians. Aeschines 
explains that each people had the same representation with two equal 
votes, for example, τὸν ἥκοντα ἐκ Awplov καὶ Κυτινίου ἴσον δυνάμενον 
Λακεδαιμονίοις, δύο γὰρ ψήφους ἕκαστον φέρει ἔθνος" πάλιν ἐκ τῶν Ἰώνων 
τὸν “Epetpia καὶ Πριηνέα τοῖς ᾿Αθηναίοις. This means that the whole 
Dorian Tetrapolis might have one of the two Dorian votes (which could 
be in the hands of a delegate from any one of the four towns), and this 
was as good as the Spartan vote. We do not, however, find that the 
Tetrapolis had one of the votes every year, but sometimes both 
delegates came from Peloponnesus. So likewise one of the Ionian 
votes, which might be given by a delegate from Euboea or one from 
_Priene (in different years), was as good as the other, which was always 
given by Athens. The Hieromnemon of Athens was chosen each year 
by lot: see Arist. Nub. 623, λαχὼν Ὑπέρβολος τῆτες ἱερομνημονεῖν. How 
this officer was chosen when he represented several disconnected towns 
is not known. 

3. Besides the twenty-four Hieromnemons, certain towns sent 
another class of delegates, called πυλάγοροι (later πυλαγόραι) or ayo- 
patpoi, who appear to have had the right to speak, but not to vote, in 
certain meetings of the Council. Photius defines πυλάγορος as ὁ πεμπό- 
μενος eis τὴν Πυλαίαν (Ὁ) εἰς τὴν ᾿Αμφικτυονίαν ῥήτωρ, ὥστε ἐκεῖ ayopedoat. 
They represented the towns which sent them, not the tribe as a whole. 
Athens sent three, chosen by the people apparently for each Amphicty- 
onic meeting, while the Hieromnemon held his membership for a year. 
We do not know the number or the manner of appointment or the 
distribution of those sent by other towns. See Hermann’s Staatsalt. 
§ 14. The meeting at which Aeschines made his inflammatory harangue, 
which stirred up the Amphissian War, appears to have been one of the 
ἱερομνήμονες exclusively, which Aeschines, as a πυλάγορος, attended only 
by special invitation of the Hieromnemon and as his representative, but 
with all his rights. See Hist. § 72. 


VI. 


The Hero Physician and the Hero ἹΚαλαμίτης. 


1. In Demosthenes xix. 249 the father of Aeschines is said to have 
_ kept a school near the shrine of the Hero Physician (πρὸς τῷ τοῦ Ἥρω τοῦ 
iatpov); and in Cor. 129 his mother is said to have lived a shameful life 


22-2 


340 ESSAYS. [vt. 


near the shrine of the Hero Καλαμίτης (πρὸς τῷ Καλαμίτῃ ἥρωι), while 
his father is said to have been the slave of a schoolmaster near the 
Theseum (πρὸς τῷ Θησείῳ διδάσκοντι γράμματα). There is great doubt 
about all these localities: the position of the real Theseum is not 
exactly known; that of the shrine of the Hero Physician is unknown, 
except that it was ἐν ἄστει; and the hero Καλαμίτης is not mentioned 
elsewhere. Many scholars identify the two school-houses; others 
identify the two shrines, making καλαμίτης equivalent to tapos. 

2. Reiske* recognized in the Hero Physician the Scythian Toxaris, 
of whom Lucian gives a pleasant account in his Σκύθης ἢ Πρόξενος. 
Toxaris, according to Lucian, came to Athens in the time of Solon, by 
whom he was kindly received. He was a physician and a man of 
general cultivation, though not of high rank at home. When his 
countryman, Anacharsis, came to Athens, he was recognized and 
welcomed by Toxaris, who introduced him to Solon. ‘Toxaris died 
and was buried in Athens. When the plague was raging in the Pelo- 
ponnesian War, the wife of an Areopagite reported that Toxaris came 
forth from his tomb and told her that the plague would cease if 
the narrow streets of the city were freely sprinkled with wine. This 
was done, and the plague disappeared. The lady pointed out the tomb 
from which the Scythian came forth. This was examined, and the 
remains of Toxaris were found within, which were identified by a 
mutilated inscription, and also by the figure of a Scythian sculptured on 
the gravestone, having in his left hand a strung bow and in his right 
what appeared to be a book (βιβλίον, ws ἐδόκει). Lucian says that more 
than half of the figure was to be seen in his time, with the bow and the 
book entire. The upper part of the stone with the face was gone. 
The monument, he says, was not far from the gate Dipylum, on the 
left of the road leading to the Academy: the stone was lying flat on 
the ground. On account of his wonderful skill in stopping the horrors 
of the plague, Toxaris was made a hero and worshipped as the “ Hero 
Physician.” He had a shrine within the city walls; and his tomb was 
always decked with wreaths, and miraculous cures were wrought there?. 

3. It happens that in the excavations outside the Dipylum gate 


1 See note on Demosth. F. Legat. p. 419, 22, with references to Lucian and to 
Corsini, Fasti Att. (Florence 1742), 11. p. 372, under Tofapideva. Corsini refers to 
Lucian’s Σκύθης, and to the residence and death of Toxaris in Athens and his deifica- 
tion; but he makes no allusion to Demosthenes. 

* Lucian, Scyth. 2. See C. I. Att. 11. nos. 403, 404, two inscriptions, probably 
of the third and second centuries B.c., which show an active interest in the worship of 
the Hero Physician, whose shrine is said to be ἐν ἄστει. 


νι} ZHE HERO PHYSICIAN AND HERO Καλαμίτης. 341 


at Athens a figure was found which in many respects agrees wonderfully 
with Lucian’s description. It represents a headless crouching Scythian, 
in his native dress, who had once held a bow in his left hand (the opening 
through which the bow passed still remaining), while under the left arm 
and held by the right hand is what, when viewed in front, appears to be 
a writing tablet, but from the side is seen to be a pointed quiver. The 


From the Revue Archéologique 
for 1864. 


chief point in which this figure fails to agree with Lucian’s description is 
that Lucian calls the monument a στήλη, while this is a statue, entirely 
free on all sides. This might be explained by the figure lying flat on the 
ground, as Lucian describes it; and it must have been flat on its back, 
or the pointed quiver could never have been mistaken for a book. 
If it was so covered by earth that only the front and the two hands, 
with the bow and the apparent book, were visible, it would have been a 
natural mistake to call it a στήλη. Indeed, any further exposure of the 
figure would at once have made the quiver visible. 

4. I therefore think there is sufficient evidence to identify this figure 
with the one seen by Lucian or his informant. Beyond a suggestion 
of Salinas, in the Revue Archéol. for 1864, that the figure is a late 


342 ESSA YS. [vI. 


substitute for Lucian’s στήλη, I have not seen any notice of their 
identity. The words βιβλίον, ws ἐδόκει, which describe the quiver, seem 
to be nearly decisive. The little figure stood for many years outside of 
the Dipylum, near the spot where it was found; and it may be seen 
there in Curtius and Kaupert’s Atlas von Athen, Map IV., No. 7, 
called “Torso eines kauernden Skythen, der nach seinem Kocher fasst.” 
It now stands in the great Museum of Athens; but the catalogues have 
no suggestion of its connection with Toxaris. 

5. We have no means of judging whether Toxaris is an historic 
character, or whether Lucian’s account of his life is as fabulous as his 
story of the plague. It is equally hard to decide whether Demosthenes 
referred to the same places in his different stories of the parents of 
Aeschines; and this is of slight consequence, as probably the only 
historic fact in them all is that Atrometus kept a school in Athens near 
the Theseum. Apollonius, in his life of Aeschines (§ 2), says of his 
father, πέδας ἔχοντα (φασὶ) διδάσκειν γράμματα πρὸς τῷ Θησείῳ καὶ TO τοῦ 
᾿Ιατροῦ ἡρώῳ, and of his mother, φασὶ τὴν πρώτην ἡλικίαν ἡταιρηκέναι 
καθεζομένην ἐν οἰκήματι πρὸς τῷ τοῦ Καλαμίτου ἡρώῳ. This may be merely 
borrowed from the tales of Demosthenes; but Apollonius seems to 
identify the two school-houses, and to make the shrine of KaAapirys a 
distinct place. Photius seems to identify the two heroes (under ἥρως), 
ἥρως ἰατρὸς, οὗ μέμνηται Δημοσθένης ἐν τῷ περὶ τοῦ στεφάνου, unless he 
carelessly refers to the wrong oration. In the note on Cor. ὃ 129° I 
have given my own suggestion as to the meaning of καλαμίτης (arrow- 
man, equivalent to τοξότης, dozwman), on the supposition that the two 
names refer to one hero. But there is little evidence of this identity, 
though Westermann thinks it is “ohne Zweifel.’”’ It would have been a 
strange coincidence (to say the least) if Glaucothea had led a disreput- 
able life near the school-house of Atrometus before her marriage ; and 
still stranger or rather impossible for her to do this after her marriage. 
G. H. Schaefer (on Cor. p. 270, 10) explains καλαμίτης as the man of 
the splints (or surgeon). Westermann explains it as ὃ ἐν καλάμοις, sup- 
posing that the hero’s statue or shrine stood in a moist place surrounded 
with veeds; others suppose a malicious reference to a statue of ᾽Α φροδίτη 
ἐν καλάμοις, erected at Samos in 440 B.c. by Athenian courtezans who 
had followed Pericles thither. See the quotation from Alexis the Samian 
in Athenaeus XIII. p. 572 F: τὴν ἐν Σάμῳ Adpodirny, ἣν οἱ μὲν ἐν Kada- 
μοις καλοῦσιν, οἱ δὲ ἐν ἕλει, ᾿Αττικαὶ ἑταῖραι ἱδρύσαντο αἱ συνακολουθήσασαι 
Περικλεῖ ὅτε ἐπολιόρκει τὴν Σάμον, ἐργασάμεναι ἱκανῶς ἀπὸ τῆς wpas. Cf. 
Thue. 1. 15, τὸ ἐν Λίμναις Διονύσου. See Dissen’s note on Cor. 1209. 


ΝΠ 2255. OF THE ORATION ON THE CROWN. 343 


VII. 


The Manuscripts of the Oration on the Crown. 


The critical notes of this edition are, with a very few exceptions, 
based on ten manuscripts, which represent different classes and show 
_ different conditions of the text. Perhaps the chief use of giving the 
readings of some even of these selected Mss. is to show how little is to be 
gained from the inferior Mss. now that & is supported by its comrade L. 
_Vomel bases his critical edition of the oration on fifty mss., from most of 
which he derives little or nothing of real value. I have made no new 
collation of any manuscripts, except that I have constantly used the 
facsimile of &, from which some useful gleanings were still to be made. 
I have also some notes of thy own, taken from the manuscript itself 
in Paris before Vomel’s collation was made. For the readings of the 
other mss. I am indebted chiefly to Vomel’s notes, supplemented by 
those of Lipsius and Blass. 

I. Σ or S, of the tenth century, written on parchment, the chief of 
all the mss. of Demosthenes, is No. 2934 of the Greek ss. of the 
National Library of Paris. On its last leaf is written, in a hand of 
a later period, Βιβλίον μονῆς τῶν Σωσάνδρων, showing that it once 
belonged to a society of monks named after Sosander, who is not other- 
wise known. Dindorf states decidedly that it belonged to a monastery 
on Mount Athos; but he gives no authority for this, and no trace of a 
Sosandrian monastery has yet been found on the Holy Mountain or 
elsewhere. ‘The manuscript first appears in Europe in the possession 
of Janos Lascaris, a learned Greek, who left Constantinople after the 
Turkish capture and was in high favour with Lorenzo de’ Medici at 
Florence. Lascaris was twice sent by Lorenzo to Greece and the 
neighbouring lands in search of manuscripts for the Medicean hbrary. 
On his second journey, begun in 1490 or 1491, he visited Constanti- 
nople, Thessalonica, Corfu, Arta, Crete, several monasteries on Mount 
Athos, and many other places. How rich a store he brought back to 
Florence may be seen from the curious manuscript (or rather collec- 
tion of manuscripts) now in the Vatican library, which was published 
by K. K. Miiller in the Centralblatt fiir Bibliothekswesen for 1884. This 
contains a catalogue of the manuscripts in the library of Lorenzo; and 
a wonderful list of 300 or 400 books which were ‘‘bought” for Lorenzo 


344 ESSAYS. [ vir. 


by Lascaris, according to the later title, πίναξ βιβλίων ἡγορασμένων ὑπὸ 
Λασκάρεως ἐν διαφόροις πόλεσιν ὑπὲρ Λαυρεντίου τῶν Μεδίκων. Probably 
many are here included which Lascaris saw on his Greek journey but 
did not or could not buy. We doubtless have the truth in the preface 
of Lascaris to the editio princeps of the Anthology (Florence 1494), 
where he says of Lorenzo, “‘ducenta nuperrime antiquorum volumina e 
Graecia et finitimis regionibus collecta in hanc praeclarissimam civitatem 
magna diligentia et sumptibus transferenda curaverat.” In the same 
Vatican manuscript is also a πίναξ τῶν βιβλίων τοῦ Λασκάρεως, ἅπερ ἔχεί 
παρ᾽ ἑαυτοῦ. Among these we find Δημοσθένης, περγαμηνόν (p. 407). 
The same volume probably appears in a list of the books of Lascaris 
(lista de’ libri che furon del St Lascheri), made by another learned 
Greek, Devaris, after the death of Lascaris at Rome in 1 535, and now 
in the Vatican library. Here we find Δημοσθένης, παλαιός, No. 34 
(corrected to 35). Devaris was then employed by Cardinal Ridolfi, 
nephew of Leo X., in collecting and arranging his library, and Ridolfi 
is said to have acquired the books of Lascaris after the latter’s death. 
In Ridolfi’s catalogue we find “35. Δημοσθένους λόγοι &B’,” evidently 
the same book which was in the list of Lascaris. 

The Greek table of contents still prefixed to 3% is said to be in the 
writing of Lascaris. Over the Latin table of contents on the next leaf 
of Σ is written, “ Hic videtur esse codex indicatus in catalogo codicum 
Graecorum Nicolai Rodulphi Cardinalis, classis oratoriae Nro. 35> 
Δημοσθένους λόγοι EB’, quamquam hic continet lviii. orationes, epistolas, 
et prooemia.” The Cardinal’s manuscripts after his death came into 
the possession of Queen Catherine de’ Medici. The title “Demos- 
thenis Orationes” etc. appears in a catalogue of the Queen’s library, in 
the inventory of her goods after her death in 1 589, and again in 1597 
in the list of her books which had passed into the Royal library. The 
Codex Σ still has a splendid binding of red leather, bearing the united 
arms of France and Navarre and monograms of Henry IV. with the 
date 1602. From this time it appears in the various inventories and 
catalogues of the Royal library, until it was entered in the catalogue of 
1740 with its present number 29341. We are therefore safe in assum- 
ing that Σ is one of the manuscripts which Lascaris, as the envoy of the 
Medici, brought to Florence from Greek lands at about the time of 


1 After all the entries of this famous Ms., from its first appearance as Δημοσθένης, 
περγαμηνόν, it is described as ‘‘chartaceus” in the catalogue of 1740, which was 
recently still in use. This remained uncorrected until 1854, when I was permitted 
to change ‘‘ chartaceus”’ to ‘‘ membranaceus.” 


vi.] MSS. OF THE ORATION ON THE CROWN. 345 


Lorenzo’s death in 1492’; and it may have come from Mount Athos, as 
Dindorf asserted. : . 

The manuscript is written with great care, in large square upright 
minuscules, which mark the transition from the uncial to the cursive 
text”. Occasionally a page or a passage is written in a similar but 
smaller hand: compare fol. 22" (κα with the preceding and following 
pages. It is unquestionably by far the best manuscript of Demosthenes, 
and with its recently discovered companion L (or Laur. S) it forms a 
distinct class, which preserves a purer and older text than any others. It 
is generally believed, and with good reason, to represent to a great extent 
the celebrated manuscripts known as “ Atticiana,” copied and revised 
under the direction of Atticus, whom Usener® identifies with T. Pom- 
ponius Atticus, the friend of Cicero, though he is generally thought to 
have been a professional maker and vender of books of a later date. - It 
must be confessed, the positive testimony connecting = with the text of 
Atticus is not wholly consistent. Harpocration quotes four readings of 
the ᾿Αττικιανά,---(1) under ἐκπολεμῶσαι, ἐκπολεμῆσαι for ἐκπολεμῶσαι, 
in 1. 7 and 11. 7, found only in 31; (2) under ἀνελοῦσα, two readings in 
XXII. 20, αὐτήν and αὐτῇ (where we have only αὑτήν or αὑτῇ), with 
(3) another variant, λα βοῦσα ἐκεῖνον before αὐτῇ (which is not in any 
Ms.) ; and (4), under vavxpapixa (which he gives as the common reading), 
Ναυκρατιτικά in XXIV. 11, which is the only reading in our Mss. 
Further, the scholia on ΧΧΙ. 147 (p. 562, 16) quote the ἀρχαία (sc. ék- 
docs) as having ἱερά for ἱερὰν ἐσθῆτα, while the scholia on ΧΧΙ. 133 
(p. 558, 16) quote the δημώδης as having ἐξ ᾿Αργούρας τῆς Εὐβοίας for the 
better reading ἀργυρᾶς τῆς ἐκ Εὐβοίας. We find ἱερά (corrected to ἱερὰν 
ἐσθῆτα) in S1 alone ; and ἀργυρᾶς only in Σὲ and & (yp). Τί is hardly to 
be doubted that the ἀρχαία (ἔκδοσις) and the ᾿Αττικιανά represent 
essentially the same purer text, which was believed by scholars to have 
the higher ancient authority, while the δημώδης (vulgata) represented the 
more common text, which was less carefully guarded against corruptions 
and interpolations. ‘The latter is supposed to be represented by such 
mss. as A 1, F, and B; while the position of higher and more ancient 
authority is conceded to Σ᾽ by the almost unanimous judgment of 
scholars. The passages are few in which 3, supported by 111, is not 
decisive against all other mMss.: of such there are perhaps twenty in 

1 For the authorities for this pedigree see the Centralblatt fiir Bibliothekswesen, 
1884, pp- 333—412, and Omont’s valuable preface to the facsimile of = (Paris, 1892), 


PP> 4» 5+ 
2 See Vomel, Contiones, p. 219; Sandys, Introd. to Lept., p. xxxix. 
8 Unser Platontext, in Gotting. Nachrichten, 1892, pp. 197—199- 


346 ESSAYS. [Vit. 


this edition of De Corona. Of course there are errors in 3, as there are 
in most printed books; and occasionally a careless mistake in copying 
has remained uncorrected, as in Cor. ὃ 257° ὀυκαλλαγῆναι for οὐ καλά 
γ᾽ ἦν ἃ (corrected in the margin), and in ὃ 312' 6 ταν for ὦ τᾶν (un- 
corrected). 

The publication of a photographic facsimile! of & has brought this 
precious document within the reach of scholars in all parts of the world. 
This, with the facsimile reproductions of the Medicean Aeschylus, the 
Laurentian Sophocles, and the Bodleian Plato, is a special boon to 
American scholars. I have been constantly indebted to the facsimile 
of = in the library of Harvard University: it has supplied what no 
apparatus criticus could have given. 

This manuscript was) first carefully collated by Bekker for his 
Oratores Attici, 1823; but it needed the study of the results of this 
collation to convince even the editor of the great importance of his 
work. ‘This appears in Bekker’s stereotype edition of Demosthenes in 
1855 (Berlin), which is based chiefly on the text of 3. Vémel devoted 
three months to the study of the ms.; and the result of his labours and 
those of other scholars was a most accurate collation, which has 
appeared in his three volumes, Demosthenis Contiones (1857), De 
Corona et De Falsa Legatione (1862)*, and Oratio adversus Leptinem 
(1866). 

Besides the original text, the manuscript contains various corrections 
and additions within the columns, some made by the original hand or 
by one of the same period, others by later correctors. Some changes 
are merely corrections of slips of the pen, not “various readings.” 
Other alterations and additions are made in the margin by the same 


* CEuvres completes de Démosthéne. Fac-simile du manuscrit grec 2934 de la 
Bibliotheque Nationale, publié par Henri Omont. 2 vols. Paris, 1892. 

* See the elaborate account of 5, with a discussion of its virtues and its faults, in 
Vomel’s Introduction to the Contiones, pp. 219—243. This is reprinted in full in 
Omont’s preface to the facsimile edition. 

5. In the following places I have noted errors or omissions in Vémel’s citations 
of = for the oration on the Crown. None of these, so far as I know, have been 
corrected by later editors. I give only the readings of >. 

δ 12%, = has ὁμοῦ (not ἐμοῦ). ὃ 23%, τὸ (not τω) κωλῦσαι Σ. § 44°, ὁ is erased 
in 5. § 46°, άισθεσθαι (n over dt) Σ. ὃ 525, μίσθωτος (changed from -rds) Σ. § 68%, 
eGehovras Σ. ὃ 93°, ὁ μέν γε φίλος = (yp). ὃ 174%, ποιήσητε (ae over e) 2. 
§ 200’, dv cov Σ. ὃ 2255, δοκεῖ τι (v over τὴ Σ. ὃ 246+, προαίσθεσθαι Σ. ὃ 2569, 
μετριώτατα (not -τα)ὴ Σ. ὃ 250", συνεσκευώρου Σ. ὃ 2608, τίς Σ, § 2667, συμ- 
βεβηκὼς (n changed to w or w) Σ, § 3222, οὐκ ἀπειλούντων, om. in ΣΙ, added 
above the line. Further examination would probably disclose other cases. 


vi.] MSS. OF THE ORATION ON THE CROWN. 34] 


variety of hands. One of the latest of these correctors (probably of the 
fifteenth century) used ink which has turned green, and his suggestions 
are generally of little value. Besides these there are many various 
readings marked yp (for γράφεται or γραπτέον), which were evidently 
copied from other manuscripts by revisers of different periods. I have 
designated these last, in = as well as in other mss., by yp in the critical 
notes, and other marginal readings by mg. Other corrections or ad- 
ditions are generally cited as 3%. I have not given the reputed age of the 
corrections, unless they are of real importance. It is generally believed 
that all the accents and breathings in & are later additions. I have 
often noted these, especially when there is any doubt concerning them, 
but with the understanding that they are no authority for the original 
text. The absence of a breathing in & is often of some negative value. 

2. L (Vomel’s Laur. S), the new companion of Σ, is in the 
Laurentian Library at Florence (Lv. 9, No. 136), and was first ex- 
amined by F. Schultz, who: published a careful account of it in the 
Jahresbericht of the Friedrichs-Gymnasium of Berlin in 18601. The 
manuscript is written by various hands. It contains orations VL, VIL., 
VIIl., 1X., X., XI., XXII, XXIV., all written in the 13th century (with some 
parts of rx. and x. wanting), followed by xx., XVIII, XIX., in another 
hand of the same century, and further by xx1u. in another of the same 
age, and by ἘΠ in a later hand. Orations 1., 11, and 11., and the 
missing parts of 1x. and x., are added bya much later hand. The older 
parts, as originally written, generally have the same purer form of the 
text which is in &; but, though the two mss. have a common arche- 
type, L was not copied from & or descended from it. Another hand 
(L?), apparently of the same period, wrote various readings, chiefly of 
the vulgar text, in the margin or above the lines, “αἴ uno conspectu et 
textum illum breviorem atque correctiorem et vulgatum intueri liceat, 
cum secunda manus primam non deleverit®.”. The second hand of L 
generally agrees with the class represented by F and B. One interest- 
ing bond of union between the first hands of } and L is that both 
omit the same disputed passages in the Third Philippic (e.g. δὲ 6, 7). 

L was carefully collated by Rehdanz for Vomel’s edition of ΧΥΠΙ. 
and xix. (1862), and I have used Vomel’s citations in this edition. 

3. As, Augustanus primus, formerly at Augsburg (whence its 
name), now No. 485 in the Royal Library at Munich, on parchment, of 


1 De codicibus quibusdam Demosthenicis ad orationem Phil. 111. nondum ad- 
hibitis. 
2 Schultz, p. 16. 


348 FS SAYS. [ vil. 


the αἰ century, is generally reckoned as next in rank to the two 
leading Mss., 3 and L. It is the chief basis of the text current before 
Bekker’s study of Σ, the text as established by Reiske. It represents a 
text far below that of Σὲ and L in purity, and much corrected by gram- 
marians’, 

4. A 2, Augustanus secundus, formerly at Augsburg, now No. 441 
in the Munich Library, is a paper manuscript of the r5th century. It 
has little distinctive character of its own; in the earlier part of the 
oration on the Crown it agrees with 3, and it very often agrees with A 1. 
Reiske says of it: “Est notae neque optimae neque pessimae, me certe 
non poenituit eum contulisse.” 

5. V6 (Vomel’s V 1) is one of the three parts (Vind. 1, Vind. 2, 
Vind. 6) which are bound together and make No. 70 of the Greek mss. 
in the library at Vienna. All three are on paper, and of the 1 5th 
century. Each part is written by a different hand. V 6, which contains 
the oration on the Crown, is chiefly remarkable for its constant agree- 
ment with Ar in the earlier part of this oration, though in the latter 
part it often has peculiar readings of its own’. 

6, 7. F (or M) and ® (or Q) are parchment mss. of the r1th 
century, Nos. 416 and 418 in St Mark’s library in Venice. They form, 
with B, a class of mss. which originally represented the vulgate text but 
were emended by the use of mss. of the better class. See under B (8). 

8. B (or Bav.), Bavaricus, is a paper Ms. of the 13th century, 
No. 85 in the Munich library. It has often been thought to be a direct 
copy of F, and its readings are often omitted by editors as being 
identical with those of F. It is now known to be from the same source 
as F, though not a copy or a descendant, the two mss. being related as 
and L. This manuscript has been brought into notice recently by 
Christ’s stichometric studies, of which it is the chief foundation®. 
B and F are also remarkable for a memorandum which is found 
in each at the end of Oration x1., which appears plainly in F, 
dwwpO[wrar] ἐγ δύο ᾿Αττικιανῶν, and in B with ay for ἐγ (both= ἐκ). 
In two later places A is found, referring to the same διόρθωσις. These 
notes show that the archetype of F and B was revised and corrected by 
the help of two mss. called ᾿Αττικιανά, which professed to represent the 


1 See Vomel, Contiones, p. 194; Usener, Unser Platontext, p. 189. 

* I have cited V 6, when it agrees with A 1, only in 88 1—25; after this only wee 
it differs from Ar. 

3 See Essay VIII. 

* See table L at the end of Vémel’s Contiones, and the table at the end of Christ’s 
Atticusausgabe ; Usener’s Platontext, p. 196, with n. 31. 


vi.) MSS. OF THE ORATION ON THE CROWN. 449 


purer and older text. ‘These little notes are the most important result 
of this revision: as Usener says, “die Berichtigung ist nicht ernst zu 
nehmen.” ‘The use of two ᾿Αττικιανά indicates what we know from the 
two readings ascribed to ᾿Αττικιανά in Harpocration, under ἀνελοῦσα 
(see p. 345, |. 18), that these mss. had a variety of various readings, and 
did not represent an absolutely fixed form of the text. 

9, to. Y and O, according to Vomel, are the leaders (duces) of a 
“familia media et mixta,” and cannot be classified with any of the mss. 
already mentioned. Usener makes Y the best representative of a class 
which has the purer vulgar text, not yet revised and emended by 
grammarians into the ordinary δημώδης". It therefore stands nearer than 
mss. like A 1 to the text of & and L. 

Y is a parchment ms. of about the eleventh century Meee 
No. 2935 in the National Library of Paris. 

O, a paper Ms. of the fourteenth century, was formerly in Antwerp, 
afterwards in Paris (where Bekker collated it), and was later discovered 
by Vomel in Brussels. It has much in common with Y; but in the 
oration on the Crown it is noted chiefly for strange or careless readings, 
as τελευτηκόσι (§ 285%), τελευτηκότων (ὃ 288°), τετελευκότων (ὃ 288°), 
τελευτηκότος (ὃ 314°). 

The readings of these ten Mss. (except those of V 6 mentioned in 
note 2, p. 348) are given whenever they can be ascertained. Besides 
these, the readings of six other Mss. are cited, each in a single case in 
which it has some special interest. 

At the last moment the Oxyrhynchus papyri give us three fragments 
of the oration on the Crown: (1) δὲ 40°?—47°, of the 2nd cent. a.p.; 
(2) δὲ 227°—229’', of the 1st or 2nd cent.; (3) ὃ 244'~*, probably of the 
3rd cent. The last has no variations from ΣΧ worth noting; the 
variations of (1) and (2) are given in the critical notes. It is worth 
noting that the papyrus agrees with & alone in omitting ἄσμενοι καὶ 
in § 43°, on which authority I have bracketed these words; it agrees 
with = and L' alone in omitting καὶ δωροδοκήματα in ὃ 43°, and with 3 
and L alone in ἡμᾶς (vulg. ὑμᾶς) in ὃ 228%, and with & and Ar in 
omitting μόνοι after ἐποιεῖτε in ὃ 43°. It has also several unique read- 


1 This appears in XXI. 133, where the scholia give the reading of the δημώδης, 
ἐξ ᾿Αργούρας τῆς Εὐβοίας (A τ, B, etc.), as opposed to the better reading ἀργυρᾶς τῆς ἐὲ 
Εὐβοίας (2). Here Y has the unintelligible reading ᾿Δργούρας τῆς ἐξ EvBoias, with 
ἀργυρᾶς corrupted to ’Apyovpas, but not yet emended by grammarians. Again, in 
Cor. 87, Y has a reading ὑφ᾽ ὑμῶν μὲν ἐξηλάθη τοῖς ὅπλοις, intermediate between ὑφ᾽ 
ὑμῶν ἐξηλάθη τοῖς μὲν ὅπλοις (Σ) and ἐξηλάθη τοῖς μὲν ὅπλοις ὑφ᾽ ὑμῶν (the emended 
δημώδης of Ar εἰς.). See Usener, Unser Platontext, pp. 188, 180. 


350 ESSAYS. [vil. 


ings : ἐκείνῳ for the troublesome τῷ Φιλίππῳ (3, L, vulg.) after ἑαυτοὺς in 
§ 42°; καί twas τῶν Ἑλλήνων (for twas δὲ καὶ τῶν “EAX.) in ὃ 4405; 
καί τινες ἐκ (for καί τινες τῶν éx) in ὃ 44"; μὴ τοιαύτης ὑπαρχούσης ὑπο- 
λήψεως (for μι τοιαύτης οὔσης τῆς ὑπαρχούσης ὑπολήψεως) in ὃ 2284, 
These last are all worth considering. 


VIII. 


Stichometry in the Manuscripts of Demosthenes. 


tr. It has long been known that several manuscripts of Demos- 
thenes have numerical statements in Greek appended to many of the — 
speeches, which have naturally been supposed to give the number of the 
lines according to some accepted standard. For example, at the end 
of the oration on the Crown in & we have this statement, 


AH ΠΕΡ MEP I 
MO Ker ΤΟΝ 
PS hs ΦΩΝ Σ ΤΕΣ 

oO 
NOY ΠΩΣ: ΦΑΝ 
τ ee Rese 
3) 9 ἘΣ 

ΧΧΙΒΗΠΙΔΊΜΗΙ 
(ΠΕ ΖΘ Ὰ 


A similar one follows almost all the speeches in Σ, the greater part 
in Bay. and F, and some in Ai. The same notices have been found in 
manuscripts of other authors; and we have the well-known statement of 
Diogenes Laertius (v. 1, 27) that the writings of Aristotle, of which he 
gives a catalogue, contain 445,270 στίχοι. None of these numbers 
agree with the number of lines in the manuscripts in which they stand; 
for example, the oration on the Crown fills 4963 lines of 3. 

2. The true explanation of these numbers was first given by 
W. Christ’, who discovered in Codex Bav. in Munich, in the left margin 
of various columns, a series of letters running from A to Q, and some- 


' Christ, Die Atticusausgabe des Demosthenes, Munich, 1882; also in Abhandl. 
d. k. bayer. Akad. XVI. 3, p. 155. 


viu.] STJCHOMETRY IN MSS. OF DEMOSTHENES. 351 


times beginning the alphabet again. Similar letters had been found in 
the margin of the Cratylus and the Symposium of Plato in the Bodleian 
Ms. and in Ven. II by Schanz, who had come to the conclusion that they 
marked intervals of 100 lines according to some standard of measure- 
ment, though no total number of lines was given at the end of the 
dialogue *. Christ found that these letters of Cod. Bav. of Demosthenes, 
on the assumption that they marked intervals of 100 lines, explained the 
total numbers at the end of the various orations. Thus the letters in the 
margin of the oration on the Crown, which (with several omissions) run 
through the alphabet (A—Q) with the addition of A, B, T, mark 2700 
lines, ending at the line beginning ἢ πᾶσιν ὅσοι in ὃ 316°. This agrees 
in general with the total of 2768 given in & (slightly corrupted in Bav. 
and F by a mistake of AHIII at the end for ATIIII). Further investiga- 
tion soon showed that there were similar numbers at similar intervals in 
the margin of several orations in 3, among them the oration on the 
Crown. But while in Bav. we have for this oration all the letters of 
the Ionic alphabet from A to Q, except Z and I, with A and B added, 
in Σ we find only I, A, E, ©, I, A, M, P, B, I. It is evident that the 
letters of the alphabet designate the numbers 1—24, as in numbering 
the books of Homer; and it is made perfectly certain by Christ that 
they mark 100 lines of text according to some generally accepted 
standard, which can hardly have been any other than a standard text 
of the Alexandrian Library. But his careful investigations show con- 
clusively that the standard copies of different orations of Demosthenes 
to which the numbers refer had lines of different length’, as will be 
seen below in comparing the standard lines of the Third Philippic 
with those of the orations on the Crown and against Aristocrates. 

3. These investigations have supplied a new and most unexpected 
argument against the authenticity of the public documents which are 
found in our texts of the oration on the Crown and of some other orations 
of Demosthenes. It is now universally admitted, on internal evidence, 
that the documents in the speech on the Crown are most transparent 
forgeries. As early as 1843, Ritschl announced, on Sauppe’s authority, 
that the numbers subscribed to the orations in & (1.6. the totals) show 
‘that the documents were wanting in the manuscript which was the 
authority for these numbers*. This general conclusion has been most 

1 Schanz in Hermes, 1881, pp. 309 ff. 

2 See Christ, Atticusausgabe, etc., and Usener, Unser Platontext, in the Gating. 
Nachrichten, 1892, pp- 101, 192. 


3 See Ritschl in the New Rhein. Mus. 11. p. 453, n.8; and Sauppe in the Abhandl. 
d. xxv. Philologenversammlung, 1867, pp. 81, 82. 


352 LSSA TS. [vii 


completely confirmed by the calculations of Christ, Blass, and others, 
who have made a comparison based on the proportion of the lines 
in the Teubner text of Demosthenes to the στίχοι of the “standard” 
manuscripts, both with and without the documents. This proportion 
in the oration on the Crown is 103 to 100 with the documents in- 
cluded, and 801 to 100 without the documents’. The comparison with 
Teubner pages cannot be perfectly exact, as the documents are printed 
in smaller type than the text of the orations. I have now made a 
comparison between the actual lines of the Codex Σὲ and the standard 
divisions (as marked by the letters in the ms.), both with and without 
the documents, these being written in = in the same hand as the text 
itself. I give only the intervals actually marked in 3; for example, 
A—T contains 300 standard lines, P—B 900. ‘The words added to the 
_numbers of the ordinary sections in column 2 are those with which 
(or within which) the lines of 3 marked by the letters begin. 


Sranderd | Modem Seesons τς | Hines. | Lines of of ett 
3. A—T I — 32%, ἡμῶν ὅτι rel, 494 28 466 | 155 
1 T—A 325— 458, ῥᾳστώνῃ 210 52 158 158 
1. A—E 45°— 597, τῆς πολιτείας Ι0ο 30 151 151 
8. E—O 59’— 99°, Εὔβοιαν 646 180 466 155 
1. O—I? 99®—1101, τὰ μέγιστα 181 32 , 149 [40 
2. I—A 110°—1343, dlrép τοῦ 387 92 315 158 
1. A—M 134°—143°, διαμαρτυρομένου 174 24 150 150 
5. M—P 143°—2088, ἀξιώϊσασα 1027 272 755 151 
g. P—B 2088— 304, οὔτε τῶν 1374 1374 153 
ι. B—Tr 304°—316°, ἢ πᾶσιν 166 166 166 
τοῦ T—end 111 114 
πω | Re 699 4264 | 153°7 


1 Christ, Atticusausgabe, p. 41. 
5.1 add the interval marked by I, which I find in Σ, to the nine given by Christ 
from Bay. 


“yu.] STVCHOMETRY IN MSS. OF DEMOSTHENES. 353 


4. It thus appears that the standard. 1oo lines correspond to a 
great variety of lines in 3 (215—165) with the documents included, while 
they correspond to numbers varying little from the average of 153°7 if 
we exclude the documents. The large number 166 in the last division 
(B—TI) is strange, and it depends solely on 3, this T being omitted! 
in Bay. ; but a reduction of it would increase the number of 74 standard 
lines which now represent the balance of 114 lines of 3, and this would 
increase the total of standard lines. Possibly there may be an un- 
- suspected interpolation in §§ 304—316 of the oration. ‘The total of 
4264 
1537 
partial items and allowing the average proportion for the balance 
of 114 lines of & which follow § 316°, exceeds the subscribed total 
of 2768 by only six lines ; and this is easily accounted for by supposing 
that the titles of the documents (ΝΟΜΟΣ etc.) sometimes occupied a 
separate line in the standard text and sometimes were added to the 
previous line or above a full column, all of which varieties are found 
in &. 

_ δ. A similar study of the oration against Aristocrates leads to quite 
different results. As the laws cited in this speech, chiefly Draconic, 
are repeated in great part in the text in the orator’s comments, their 
genuineness, so far as substance goes, is well assured. It might, how- 
ever, be doubted whether the documents which we now find were a 
constituent part of the speech as it was originally published, or were 
made up from the orator’s remarks or taken from some authentic 
copies at a later date. ‘The total number of lines in this speech is not 
given either in Bav. or in }; but Bav. has 16 marginal letters, B—A, 
@—#, Il—®, which carry us to § 208°, within 34 pages of the end. 
> has A, B, T, A, including δὲ 1—45'. ‘The whole passage §§ 1—208° 
includes 2100 lines (A—®) of the standard text, and 3242 lines of Σ. 
This would give an average of 154,% lines of & to roo standard lines. 
As the documents fill about 55 lines of 3, the omission of these would 
reduce the average to 1514 lines. The following table will show that 
this is not the correct method, and also that it is equally impossible to 
suppose a// the documents to have been included in the standard 
_ text. JI have given the standard pages marked A, B, I, and A 
as they stand in 3%; for the later divisions I follow Christ’s account* 
of Bav. 


2774 standard lines ( x 100) which we obtain by combining the 


1 See Christ, Atticusausgabe d. Demosthenes, p. 14. 
2 Ibid. p. 15. 


ἧ 
354 ESSA YS. [ vill. 
1 A, §§1— 123= 154 lines of Z (no documents)...........++:: 154 
Tite ΒΒ νυ} 205 se EG Τ᾿ »  — 6 (doc.)...aieeeeeeee 153 
ee Bly 120 ae eg bt te »  — 9 (ss [ἘΞ 152 
ne) Oy 85λΥ-- dh SO, et » — 12 (+53 )eoeeeee 147 
5.’ A—I, 45'— go*= 763 (av.152%),, — 28 (5, )=9anmeee av. 147 
12. I—*, go*—208°= 1846 κι » (no documents) jee av. 1534 


6. It thus appears that the two passages (A and I—®), which have 
no documents, agree essentially in the number of lines of Σὶ which make 
the standard roo lines, and this agrees also with B and TI if the docu- 
ments are left out. This also agrees essentially with the average 
number of lines (153°7) of & in the oration on the Crown which 
correspond to the standard roo lines. But B and I with the documents 
exceed these numbers. On the other hand, A is reduced from 159 
to 147 by omitting the two laws in §§ 37 and 44; and A—I, which with 
the 28 lines of documents in & give an average of 1523, by the omission 
of these are reduced also to 147. Can it be that one of the laws in A 
and all of those in A—I were in the standard text? 

The law in ὃ 37 is believed by Kohler on strong grounds to have 
formed part of the decree of 412 B.c. in C. I. Att. 1. No. 61, which 


contains another law of Draco. It is true, only twelve letters are | 


legible in the three lines occupied by the law in question; but these 
letters stand on the stone in precisely the places to which they would 
belong if the law were inscribed there. Thus we have OPI-& where 
ἐφορίας would stand, and ETA. at the end of a line for é@eras. If we 
add the seven lines occupied by this law in 3, we raise 147 to 154 in 
division A, which agrees with the two divisions which have no docu- 
ments. If we may further assume that all the laws in division A—I 
(which are known to be essentially genuine) were included in the 
standard text, we raise 147 here to 152%. We should thus have for the 
six divisions, 154, 153, 152, 154, 1522, 153¢, in substantial agreement, 
considering the slight uncertainty as to the beginning of the divisions. 
7. The stichometry of the Third Philippic, to which we naturally 

turn with interest, is strange and inconsistent. ‘The total number of 
standard lines is 580, and & has 842, giving an average of 1454% to the 
standard roo. Five divisions are marked, but only in Bav. (so far as is 
known); and these are as follows : 

A to 125=141 lines of = A to 52°=145 lines of = 

B 5 245=141 5, Τ᾽ | E ,, 65°=150 im 9 

Co ata r4ara a νὰ 

If A and B alone were noted, we should have an irresistible ar- 

gument against the genuineness of the doubtful passages, which are 


al “« 


ym] STICHOMETRY IN MSS. OF DEMOSTHENES. 455 


omitted in 34 and Li alone. About twenty-five S-lines of these are in 
A, and only four or five in B; and yet both divisions were of the same 
length in the standard text, and both now have 141 in 3. Codex Bav., 
which includes these passages, must have about twenty more lines in A 
than in B. About 12 lines of Τ' and about 25 of A are omitted in 3, 
which nevertheless has 147 and 145 lines in these divisions. In E there 
are 150 lines in 3, with only 4 or 5 omitted. It is obvious that the 
standard lines were shorter in the Third Philippic than in the Crown',; 
but it is also obvious that stichometry does little to settle the question 
of interpolations, unless we assume either that there are interpolated 
passages, amounting to about 19 lines, in divisions I’, A, and E, which 
are not omitted in 3! or Ll. On any other supposition, especially on 
that of retaining all the suspected passages as they stand in the vulgate, 
the stichometry of the speech on the basis of Codex Bav. is impossible’. 


1 See p. 351, note 2. The Second Philippic has about 148 lines of = to the 
standard roo, the First Philippic about 154, and the oration on the Chersonese about 
152 (all without documents). 

2 For a full discussion of the documents in the text of Demosthenes, see E. Drerup, 
᾿ Jahrbiicher fiir class. Philologie, 24th Suppl. Band, 1898, pp. 221—366. 


23—2 


GREEK 


A 
ἀγαπητὸν εἶναι 157 
ἀγάσαιτο 144 
ἀγνοίᾳ (ὧν év) 47 
ἀγνωμοσύνη 66, 147, 177 
ἄγραφα νόμιμα 193 
ἀγών, lawsuit, 11, 14, 18. 
ελθεῖν 74 
ἀγωνία 32 
ἀγωνίζομαι 0, 19, 72, 128, 144, 185 
ἄδειαν λαβεῖν 200 
ἀδίκημα, ἁμάρτημα, ἀτύχημα, distinguished 
192 
ἀδικῶ as perfect 213 
ἀθῷος go, 190 
αἰτία 12 
ἀκήρυκτος πόλεμος 185 
ἀκονιτί 142 
ἀκούουσιν, audiunt, 39 
᾿ἀκρωτηριάζω 208 
ἀλάστωρ 208 
ἀλιτήριος 117 
ἀλλὰ νῦν 135 
ἄμεινον πράττειν 178 
᾿Αμφικτύονες 111, 224. 
ἕαντα 116 
ἀμφισβήτησις ὡς οὔ 
Αμφισσέων δόγματα 104 
ἀμφότερα ταῦτα 103, 104, 125 
ἀναγκαιότατα (αὐτὰ τὰ) 92, 122 
ἀναισθησία, ἀναίσθητοι, 33, 37, 93 
ἀναλαβεῖν 120 
ἀναλγησία, ἀνάλγητοι, 33, 37 


ἀγῶνα εἰσ- 


᾿Αμφικτύοσι δό- 


INDEX. 


The references are made to pages, and relate especially to the notes. 


ἄν after comma 11; ἄν w. all past tenses 
of indic. 30 

ἀναπνεῦσαι 139 

ἀναφορά 157 

avédnv 15 

ἄνευ, besides, 63 

ἀντανελεῖν 163 

ἀντί, rather than, 79 

ἀντίδοσις 235, 236 

ἀντωνούμενος (conative), bidding, 168 

ἄνω καθῆτο (in the Pnyx) 124 

ἄνω καὶ κάτω διακυκῶν 80 

ἀξιῶ, judge, 179; ἀξιῶ καὶ δέομαι 11, 32. 
ἀξιοῦσα as impf. 142 

ἀξίωμα IIIT 

ἀπηντηκώς 19 

ἁπλῶς 215 

ἀπὸ βωμοῦ φέρειν ψῆφον 99 

ἀπὸ ποίας ἀρχῆς; 112 

ἀπολύσασθαι 42 

ἀπολωλέναι πολλάκις 155 

ἀπομάττων 182 

ἀπόνοια and μανία 174 

ἀποπεφευγότα 158 

ἀπόρρητα 89, go 

ἀποσιώπησις 9, 24, 139 

ἀποστολεῖς 78 

ἀπόστολος and ἀποστέλλω 58, 77 

ἀπόφασις (of Areopagus) 98, 99, 100 

ἀποψήφισις and ἀποψηφίζομαι 96, 97 

ἀρουραῖος Οἰνόμαος 169 

ἄρρητα 89, 90 

ἀρχὴ καὶ κατάστασις 133 


358 


ἀρχιτέκτων (of theatre) 29 

ds pév...as δέ 54 

dopahws Sovdevew! 144 
ἀτιμώσαντες 50 

ἄττης ὑῆς 183 

ἀτυχηθέντα 150, [51 
αὐτεπαγγέλτους ἐθελοντάς 52: cf. 71 
αὐτόματος θάνατος 145 
αὐτοτραγικὸς πίθηκος 169 
αὐτοῦ, on the spot, 78 
αὐτόχειρ 201 

ἀφαιρεῖσθαι (conative) 17, 146 
ἀφορμάς 164 


B 
Badifw το, 46, 186 
βακτηρία 149 
Bapets 22 
βάσανος 98 
Barrados 131 
βοᾶν 25. βοᾷς ἔχων 59 
βέλτιστα πράττειν 177 
βελτίω καὶ ἐκ βελτιόνων 14 
βλασφημία and βλασφημῶ 14, 67, 80 
βούλει θῶ; 130, 131 
βουλομένῳ τινί ἐστιν 15 


Γ 

γεγενημένον εἶναι 200 

γενόμενον w. ψήφισμα 130 

γέρρα (τὰ) 123 

γίγνεσθαι, genuine in 8 130°, 96 

γιγνόμενον (τὸ), guota, 75 

γράμματα 94 

γραμματεῖον ληξιαρχικόν οὔ, 97 

γραμματεύειν 184 

γραμματοκύφων 148 

γραφὴν (or δίκην) διώκειν 177. - ἑλεῖν 9- 
γραφή in narrower sense 174 

γράφω, propose, enact, 12, 45, 212. γρά- 
ῴομαι (mid.), ἐγιαἶϊεί, 18, 60, 86, 177. 
γέγραμμαι and ἐγράφην pass. of both 
γράφω and γράφομαι 45, 46, 62, 85, 
86, 158. γράφειν παράνομα and γρά- 
ῴφεσθαι παρανόμων 18, 86 


Δ 
δεῖγμα 205 
δελεαομένων 39 


GREEK INDEX. 


δευτέρου κηρύγματος 60; cf. 86 

δῆμος used for Heliastic court 17 

δημοτικός 12, 80 

διὰ ὑμᾶς αὐτούς (cond.) 41 

διὰ τούτους οὐχὶ πεισθέντας 31 (cf. 37) 

δι’ ὧν and δι᾽ οὕς 32 

διαδικασία 235 

διαιτηταί 128 

διακονία 146 

διαμαρτύρομαι 58 

διαμεμετρημένη ἡμέρα 103 

διασύρω 27, 92, 156, 221, 226 

διατελῶ w. participle 7, 119 

διατύπωσις 122 

διαψήφισις and διαψηφίζομαι 96, 97 

διδάσκειν γράμματα 94 

διδόναι, ἐδίδοσαν, offered, 74, 75 

διῆγεν ὑμᾶς 64 

δίκαιον ἦν, we ought, 19 

δίκαιος εἶναι (personal), rr, 43. 
12, iy 


δίκαια 


δικαιότερα ἀξιοῦν 154 

δίκας ἐπάγειν III, 112, 174, 224 

διωβελία 29 

δοκιμασία 187, 188 

δόξαν, εὔνοιαν 66 

δύναμαι, ellipsis of w. ὡς and superl., 179, 
180 

δύναμις 38, 78 (w. refer.). 

δυναστεία 51, 190, 225 es 

δυοῖν θάτερον (without verb) 103, 104 

δυοῖν ὀβολοῖν (ἐν τοῖν) 29 

δύσκολον 127 


δυνάμεις 164 


E 


ἐγγράφεσθαι (els δημότας) 184 

ἐγκλήματα ἐταράχθη 112 

ἐγκώμια 146 ͵ 

ἔγνωσμαι always passive 162 

ἐθελοντής 52, 71 

εἰ (or 7) in 2nd pers. sing. mid. 86 
(w. refer.) 

el w. ἔστι, ἦν, and ἂν ἔχοι 135 

εἰ w. fut. ind. and ἐάν w. subj. compared — 
127. εἰ w. opt. and ἐάν w. subj. com- 
pared 109, 110 

εἴ γ᾽ ἔγραφεν (for εἰ γέγραφεν) 57 

εἰ δοκοίη... οὐδέν ἐστι 23 


GREEK INDEX. 


εἰ εἴποιμι καὶ εἶπον τοῦ 

εἰ ἐπεχείρησ᾽ ἄν 72 

εἰ ἐπεχείρουν, οὐκ ἂν ἐπιτιμήσειε 146 

εἱμαρμένης θάνατος 145 

εἵνεκα 87, 107, [27 

εἶπε λέγων 45 

εἰς τὴν ἐπιοῦσαν Πυλαίαν 113 

εἰς τὸν νοῦν ἐμβάλλεσθαι 51 

εἰς τοὺς συκοφάντας ἄγειν 81 

εἰσαγγελία and εἰσαγγέλλειν 17, 335 

elapopa 180 

elre...elre (after article) 22 

ἐκ παντὸς τοῦ χρόνου 27, 50, 144 

ἐκνίψει 105 

᾿ ἐκπίπτειν 187 

᾽᾿Ἔλευσϊῖνάδε 128 

ἑλλεβορίζεις 88 

“Ἑλληνικὰ, οἰκεῖα, and ξενικά 217. Ἑλλη- 
νικὰς πράξεις 46 

ἐμβεβηκώς 173 

ἐμβρόντητε 170 

"Ἔμπουσα 95 

ἐν μερίδι 127 

ἐν οὐ δέοντι 98 

ἐν χερσὶν ἔχειν 160 

ἐνδοξότατα ἁπάντων 50 

ἐνειστήκει 102 

ἐνῆν (personal) 135 

ἔνθρυπτα 184 

ἐνόσουν (figurative) 39 

ἐνστάς 63 

ἐνταῦθ᾽ ἀπήντηκας; QI 

ἐξ ἁμάξης 80 

ἐξ ὧν ζῆς 141 

ἐξαιτούμενος 224 ; ἐξῃτούμην 36 

ἐξαίφνης (τό y’) 114 

ἐξετάζεσθαι and ἐξέτασις 125 and 126 (w. 
references), 194, 217, 223 

ἐξετασμός (rare) 19 

ἐξήρκει, satis erat, 139 

ἐξίσταμαι w. acc. and dat. 222 

ἐξόδους πεζάς 72 

ἐξούλης δίκη 236 

ἔξω ὄντων 153 

ἑόρακα (not éwp.) 49, 135 

ἐξώλεις καὶ mpow ers 226 

ἐπαγγειλάμενος 81 

ἐπαχθεῖς 93 


359 


ἐπέδωκα 81 

ἐπεζήτησε 98 

ἐπειδάν ν᾽. aor. subj. 39, 40 

ἐπειδή w. plupf. and aor. 26, 37 

ἔπειτα (without δέ) after πρῶτον μέν 8, 
21 

ἐπεξειργάσατο 104 

ἐπερωτήσω 63 

ἐπήνεσεν 81 

ἐπήραμαι LO5 

ἐπήρεια and ἐπηρεάζω 16, 17, ΤΟΙ, 223 

ἐπηρτημένων 227 

᾿ ἀληθείας οὐδεμιᾶς 20 

ἐπ᾽ ἐλπίσιν 64 


> 
επτ 


ἐπὶ τῆς ἀληθείας 160 

ἐπὶ τοῖς συμβᾶσιν 140, 198, 199 

ἐπὶ χρήμασι 39 

ἐπιδόσεις 125 (cf. ἐπέδωκα) 

ἐπιμονή (Hermog.) 48 

ἐπιστάτης τοῦ ναυτικοῦ g7; ἐ. τῶν πρυ- 
τάνεων 122; ἐ. τῶν προέδρων 257, 258 

ἐπιτιμία 19. ἐπιτίμια (τά) 18 

ἐπιτείχισμα and ἐπιτειχισμός 53, 62 

ἐρρῶσθαι φράσας 113 

ἔστιν ὅπου (temporal) 24 

ἐστὶ πρὸς ἡδονήν 10 

ἔστω γάρ 194 

ἕτερος of Alexander—érepo of the Mace- 
donians 223, 225. 
32. ἑτέρῳ ὅτῳ το. 
τος 38 

εὔθυναι 79, 8ο---86, go. 
μαίνεσθε 175 

εὔνοια 7, 13, 126 (see note), ΙΟΙ; 220, 
224, 228 

εὔνους 140, 205 

evot σαβοῖ 183 


ἕτερον = ἀλλότριον 
ἕτερος λόγος οὗ- 


εὐθύνας ἐπεση- 


εὐπροσώπους III 

εὐσέβεια ὃ 

ἐφ᾽ αὑτοῦ 159 

ἐφάμιλλος 223 

ἐφεστηκότα (κίνδυνον) 128 (w. references) 

ἔφυγον κακὸν, εὗρον ἄμεινον 182 

ἐχρῆν, ἔδει, etc., not implying unreal 
condition 48 (w. refer.) 

ἔχων w. διατελῶ 7 

ἑωλοκρασία 42 

ἕως (final) 31 


360 


Z 
ζῆλος 87, 155, 191 


ζώντων καὶ ὄντων 54 


Η 
ἢ (or εἰ) in 2nd pers. sing. mid. 86 
ἦθος, ἤθη 78, 82, 144, 193 
ἡλικίᾳ (οἱ ἐν) 128 
ἤμελλεν 125, 136 
ἦν.. ἀπεσταλμένη (not plupf.) 25 
ἦν, ἧκε, κατείληπται (tenses) 122, 123 


Θ 


θέαν κατανεῖμαι 28, 29 

θεατροπώλης and θεατρώνης 28 

θεός masc. and fem. (ἡ θεός, for Athena) 7 
θεριστάς 42 

“ θιάσους 183 

θεώρημα 52 

θόλος 122 

θρασυνομένῳ 100 


Ι 


ἰαμβειογράφος and ἰαμβειοφάγος 103 
ἴδιαι καὶ δημόσιαι δίκαι 149 

ἰδίων (ἀπὸ τῶν) 80 

ἰδιωτῶν 30 

ἱερομνήμονες 11ο, 287, 338 

ἱκετηρία (sc. ῥάβδος) 77 

wa w. perf. subj. 129, 130 
ἱπποτρόφος 223 


K 
καθ᾽ ὑμῶν 154 
καθαιρώσιν (ἂν ψῆφοι) 161 
κάθαρμα 93 
καθυφεῖναι 77 
καὶ expr. parallelism 11, 45, 47 
κακαγγελεῖν 188 
κακία 22 (w. refer.), 


52, 209 
κακοήθης 15 

Kadapirns (ἥρως) 94, Essay VI. 
καλώς ποιεῖν 163 

κάμνοντες, patients, 169 
κατακλυσμὸν Ww. τῶν πραγμάτων I 52 
καταλιθώσαντες 145 

καταλύω 59 

κατατυχεῖν 129 

καταχειροτονία 240 


GREEK INDEX. 


κατηγορία and κατηγορῶ 13, 18, 19, 89 
κατορθώ Ww. accus. 199 
Κεφάλου (τὸ καλόν) 176 
Κέων, τὰς (for Κλεώνας) 68 
κίναδος τόρ 

κιττοφόρος 183, 184 
κλέμμα 30 

κοινός 189 

κομίσασθαι χάριν 83 
κρατηρίζων 182 

κύκλῳ (τὰ) 68 


λαγὼ βίος τ86 

λαρυγγίζων 205 

λέγει and ἀναγιγνώσκει 28 

λεύκη 183 

λῃσταί 162, 163 

Anroupyia and λῃτουργῶ 73, 75, 188 
λογισταί 84, 85, 162 

λόγον διδόναι (or λαβεῖν) 13, 48 
λόγον ἐκ λόγου λέγων 210 


λόγου κρίσις τόο 
λοιδορία and λοιδορεῖσθαι 12, I4, 15, 19, 
89, IOI 


λοιπὸν ἣν 25 


Μ 


μακράν (eis) 33 

μανία and ἀπόνοια 174 

μάραθος, λεύκη 183 

Μαραθώνι, locative, 147 

μασχαλίξω 208 

μεγαλοψυχία and μεγαλόψυχος 51 

μεθημερινοὶ γάμοι 94 

μέλλοντος λέγειν 99, 100 

μέρει or μερίδι (ἐν) 127, 205 

μέρος (τὸ, or τὸ πέμπτον) τῶν ψήφων 74, 
158, 175, 188 

μεστοὶ τοῦ συνεχώς λέγοντος 216 

μεταθέσθαι 128 

μεταξύ (τὸν μ. χρόνον) 26, 57 

μέτριος 14. 92 

μέχρι.. ἀφ᾽ ἧς 50 

μέχρι τούτου ἕως 40 

μὴ μεταδοῖεν (Σ) 64 

μηδὲν ἐξελέγχεσθαι 50 

Μηναγύρτης 181 


GREEK 


μήνυσις 97 
μήτ᾽ av wnOn ῥηθῆναι 160 
Μητραγύρτης 181 
Μητρῷον 106 
μικροῦ, almost, 112. 
μικροψυχία 190, 196 
μισθωτός 43 
μνησικακεῖν 663 as active 70 
Μυσῶν λεία 54 

= N 
ναύκληρος, figure of, 137 
νεανίας 100, 219 
νεβρίζων 182 
νομιζόμενα (τὰ) φέρειν 170 
pov, as it was, 114 
νῦν and τότε, not temporal, 138, 142, 168 


O 


μικροῦ δεῖν 190 


Οἰνόμαος 131, τόρ 

οἴχομαι w. partic. 36, 49 

ὅλα (Ta) 29, 195, 213 

ὄλεθρος 92, 93 

ὀλίγου δεῖν 22 

ὁμοίως, guile as well, 30 

ὁμωρόφιον 200 

ὁπηνίκα w. unreal cond. 18 

ὁπλίτην δ᾽ ἱππέα 165 

ὅπλοις (τοῖς μὲν) 62 

ὅπλοις κατεστρέφετο 171 

ὅποι πεμφθείην and ὅποι ἐπέμφθην 38, 170 
ὁποιουσδήποτε (rel.) 108 

ὁποστοσοῦν 217 

dpa μὴ ἧς οἵ 

ὀρθὴν (τὴν) sc. ὁδόν 80 

ὀρθῶς ἔχον 17 

ὅρκον ἀπολαμβάνειν and ἀποδοῦναι. 26, 27 
ὁρμεῖν ἐπὶ τῆς αὐτῆς (sc. ἀγκύρας) 196 
. bs συνήδειν 50 

ὅτι before direct quotation 35, 126 
ὅτου δήποτε ἕνεκα 24 

ὅτῳ ἀπέκειτο 140 

οὐ γάρ; 100 

οὗ... ἐνταῦθα go, ΟἹ 

οὐδ᾽ ἂν εἷς 52 

οὐδ᾽ ἐγγύς τό, 69 

οὐδ᾽ ὅσια 155 

οὐδ᾽ οὕτως 142 

οὐδαμοῦ (temporal) 19, 24 


INDEX. 361 
οὐδὲ (sc. μόνον) 8, 66, 77 

οὐδὲν ἂν ἦν (ἄν required) 40 

οὐκ ἂν ἐπρέσβευσαν (iter.) 157 

οὐκ ἦν... εἰ μὴ ποιήσειε 107 

οὔκουν ἐπί γ᾽ οἷς 217 

οὔκουν οὐδέ 196 

οὐσία and τίμημα 75, 180 

οὔτε, οὔτε, οὔτε, after od 17 

οὕτω μέχρι πόρρω 120 

οὐχ ὅπως . «ἀλλά 96 

οὐχ ὁρᾷς; and ὁρᾷς; 164, 188, 196 
ὀφθαλμὸν ἐκκόπτεσθαι 50 


II 


παιδαγωγεῖον 181 

πάντα nv (τινι) 37 

πάντα τὰ πολλά 139 

πανταχοῦ, anywhere, 59 

πάντων, anything, 11 

παρὰ τοῦτο γέγονε 164 

παραγεγραμμένοι νόμοι 80 

παράκλητοι 106 

παραπρεσβεία 103, 333 

παράσημος τόρ 

παραστῆσαι ὃ, 13 

παραταξάμενοι 147, 154; 200 

παρεδύετο 58 

παρεθέντα and προεθέντα 213 

παρεῖαι 183 

παρελθεῖν ὥσπερ νέφος 134 

παρηκολούθεις 119. παρηκολουθηκότα 125 

παρών 24, 60, 84, 158, 168 

πᾶσα ἡ οἰκουμένη 41 

πατρῷος (᾿Απόλλων) 105 

πεῖραν διδόναι 77, 139 

πέμπτον μέρος τῶν ψήφων 188 (cf. μέρος) 

πεπαῦσθαι 188 

περιβαλλόμενος 163 

περίδειπνον 201 

περιείργασμαι 54 

περιελθεῖν 111, 112 

περίεστιν 93. περιεῖναι χρήματά τῳ 161 

περιιδεῖν Ww. pres. or aor. partic. or 
infin. 49 

περιουσίας (ἐκ) 9 

περίτριμμα ἀγορᾶς 92 

πλησίον δείξας 127 

πλίνθοι 210 


362 

πόθεν ; 40 (w. refer.), 42, 105. πόθεν... 
ἀξιωθέντι; 42, 93 

ποιῶ and πράττω τὸ, 48, 172 

πολιτεῖαι (Aristotle) 50 

πολιτεύεσθαι 102 

πολίτευμα τοο 

πολιτικὰ ταῖς πόλεσι 172 

πολιτικὴ καὶ κοινή 218 

πολιτικόν 17 

πολλῷ ῥέοντι TOO 

πομπεία and πομπεύειν 15, 89, go. Cf. 
ἐξ ἁμάξης 

πονησάντων σκευῶν 137 

πρᾶξις, fortune, 224. 
μαχίαν 24 

πράττω and ποιῶ to, 48, 172 


πρᾶξιν Kal συμ- 


πρὸ τῆς ἀληθείας 117 

προαίρεσις and προαιρεῖσθαι 16, 26, 46, 
66, 78, 196, 197, 202, 216, 221, 224. 
προαίρεσις πολιτείας 136 

προβάλλεσθαι ἐλπίδα, συμμαχίαν, etc. 69, 
E30, ΙΓ, 212 

προβληθείς το, 199 

προβολή 240 

προβούλευμα (of Senate) 13 

προβουλεύω 43, 124 

πρόεδροι 124 

προεθέντα and παρεθέντα 213 

προείλεσθε Og 

προεξειλεγμένα 165 

προθεσμία go, ΟἹ 

προΐεσθαι 51, 558. ᾿πρόοιντο 17 

προκινδυνεύω 147 

προπίνω 208 

πρὸς ἱστορίαν 107 

πρός τινι γίγνεσθαι 127 

προσάγειν εἰς ἐκκλησίαν 28 

προσελθεῖν τῷ δήμῳ 17 

προσέχετε τὸν νοῦν 129. προσσχόντες T. 
νοῦν 125 

προσθεμένην 144. 

πρόσχημα 129 

προτιθέναι 191 


προσθέσθαι 161 


προὔλαβε καὶ κατέσχε 47 
πρόφασις τύο 

προώλεις 226 

πυλάγοροι TIO, 111, 339 
ἸΠυλαία 10g 


GREEK INDEX. 


Β 


ῥέπων ἐπὶ τὸ λῆμμα 209, 210 
ῥήγματα καὶ σπάσματα 141 
ῥήματα μιμούμενος 164 

ῥητὰ καὶ ἄρρητα 80 

ῥητόρων ἀγών 160 


Σ 


σαλπικτής 123 

σεμνολόγου 98 

σεμνότης (of Aesch.) 33 
σεμνῶς 33 (w. refer.), 130 
σῖτος ἐπείσακτος 62 

σιτώνης 174 

σκαιός 171 

σκευαγωγεῖν 34 

σκηπτός 137 

σοφίζεται τότ 

σπάσματα 141 

σπερμολόγος 92 

στρεβλώσαντες 98 ἡ 

στρεπτούς 184 

συγκαθήμενοι τοῦ 

συγκρούω 22, 120 

συκοφάντης 134, 135 
σύμβολον 149 
συμπαραταξάμενοι τὰς πρώτας 154 
συμπνευσάντων ἄν (not -σόντων) 122 
σύνδικος 98 

συνειλοχώς 216 

συνεξέδωκα 189 

συντελής 75 

συσκευωροῦμαι 182 

συστεῖλαι 172 

σφετεριζόμενος 53, 71 
σωτηρίας (gen. of purpose) 72 


T 
Ta ὅλα 146 
τὰ πρός με 18 
τᾶν, ὦ 218 
τάξει (ἐν) 17, 48, 223 
τάξιν ἔλιπον 125 
ταράσσειν (active) 112, 114 
τειχίζω and τειχισμός 210 
τειχοποιοί, board of, 82, 327 
τετύφωμαι 15 
τί ἐδύνατο 26 
τί κακὸν οὐχί; 41 


GREEK INDEX. 


τίθημι 178; w. infin. in or. od/. 178. 
νόμον τιθείς (or θείς) 12 

τίμημα and οὐσία 75, 180 

τιμησαίμην ἄν (w. gen.) 152 

τίμησις 103 

Τίς ἀγορεύειν βούλεται; 124 

τίς ἦν (w. aor. partic.) 63 

tis τίνος; 55 

τὸ δ᾽ αἴτιον (without ὅτι) 78 

τὸ δέ (without τὸ μέν) 105 

τὸ καὶ τό 170 

τὸ τῇ πόλει (or τῆς πόλεως) συμφέρον 30 

τολμήσαι 51 

τοσούτῳ (or τοσούτου) δέω 8ο 

τοῦ πότε δεῖ βαδίζειν 129 

τοὺς πολλοὺς λόγους 104 

τραγῳδία 93 

τραγῳδοῖς καινοῖς (temporal) 44 (γραφή) 

τραγῳδῶ 17 

τριακόσιοι, οἱ 74, 125 

Tpinpavrns 95 

τριταγωνιστής 148, 185 

τρυτάνη 209 

τυγχάνω w. pf. partic. go 

τυμπανιστρία 198 

τυχόν, perhaps, 158 

τῷ διαφθαρῆναι ἢ μή 172 

τῶν δ᾽ (without μέν) 88 

τῶν καθ᾽ ὑμᾶς 67 

τῶν φύντων κακῶν 117 


aC 

ὕδατι, ἐν τῷ ἐμῷ 103 

ijs ἄττης 183 

ὑπακούσατε 107 

ὑπάρχω 8, το, 26, 47, 59, 67, 72, 73; 
Saag, 520, -129}:.-165;-—-188, 207. 
τῶν ὑπαρχόντων ἑκατέροις 108, 109. 
ὑπῆρχεν w. infin. like ἔδει etc. 214, 

pears 

ὑπείλημμαι 190 

ὑπέρ and περί 14 (w. refer.), 20 

ὑπὲρ τῶν ἐχθρῶν βεβουλευμένοι 166 

ὑπὲρ ὑμῶν K.T.r. 8 

ὑπερηφάνως 177 

ὑπεύθυνος 134 

ὑποκρίνεσθαι 19, 201 

ὑπομνήμαθ᾽ ὁρᾶν 52 


363 


ὑποσκελίζειν ΤΟΙ 
ὕπουλος ἡσυχία 215 
ὑπωμοσίᾳ, ἐν 74, 75 
ὑφορώμενοι 37 

Φ 
φῇ τις; 90 
φθόνου δίκη 88 
φιλιππισμός 206 
φιλονεικία 105 
φοιτᾶν 187 
φορὰ πραγμάτων Ot 
φρουρά (Spartan) 67 
φρουροί (Athenian) 128 
φύεσθαι κατὰ πάντων 22 
φυλαττόμενος τὸ λυπῆσαι 181, 219 
φωνὰς, πάσας ἀφῆκε 138 
φωνῇ δακρύειν 201 


Χ 
χάρακα 63 
χειμαρροῦς 114 
χοίνικας καὶ ξύλον 94 
χρημάτων σύνταξις 165 
χρῆν προσδοκᾶν w. two protases 138. 
χρῆν and χρῆν ἄν 138 
χρηστέ (ironical) 222 
χρῆται τῷ λόγῳ 177 


Ψ 


ψῆφον ἀπὸ βωμοῦ φέρειν gg 
ψυχρότης 179 
Ω 

ὡμολογεῖτ᾽ ἄν τ 

ὧν βεβίωκεν 95 

ὧν ἔτυχεν 95 

ὠνεῖται ὅπως μὴ ἄπιμεν 531 

ὠνούμενος (conative) 173 

ws w. partic. (not cond.) 194 

ws av ἔχητ᾽ εὐνοίας 194 

ws els ἐλάχιστα 172 

ws ἑτέρως 61, 150, 215 

ὥσπερ (not conditional) 193, 1943 ὥσπερ 
οὐχ 226. 

wore w. pres. and aor. infin. 51, 59; 
w. perf. and pres. infin. 180; w. infin. 
and ἄν 20, 21; w. indic. 32, 87. ὥστε 
ov w. infin. 198 


ὥσπερ ἂν εἰ ἡγούμενοι 152 


ENGLISH. INDE 


Lhe references ave made to pages. 


A 

»Abydos 212 

Achaeans 166 

Aeacus, Rhadamanthus, and Minos 92 

Aegina 68 

Aeschines: parentage and youth 93; 
94, 244; as clerk 184, 244; as actor 
131, 185, 244; opposes Philip w, 
Eubulus 244, 245; at Megalopolis 
245; envoy to Philip 247, 257, 264; 
suit ag. Timarchus 333; rejected as 
counsel in case of Delos 98, 99, 270; 
supports Python 271; tried for παρα- 
πρεσβεία and acquitted 336, 337; 
speech at Delphi (339 B.c.) 287—290; 
envoy (w. Demades) to Philip after 
Chaeronea 297 ; indicts Ctesiphon 328, 
trial of case 329, acquittal of Ctesi- 
phon 331; voluntary exile 331; at 
Rhodes 332; five periods of life (De- 
mosth.) 187; his two brothers 221 

Agesilaus 21 

Aleuadae of Larissa, aided by Philip 4o, 
233 

Alexander I. of Macedonia 143 

Alexander the Great, born 231; at Chae- 
ronea 2943; destroys Thebes 36, 328; 
demands Attic orators 36, 328; re- 
ceives crowns from Athens 223; in- 
vades Persia 328; dies at Babylon 305 

Ambracia 171 

Amphictyonic Council 109, 111, Essay 
V.; summoned by Philip in 346 B.c. 


265; addressed by Aeschines 287— 
290 

Amphipolis 52, 230, 231, 248 

Amphipolitan War 22, 231 

Amphissa destroyed by Philip 294 

Amphissian War stirred up by Aesch. 
107—II7, 119, 287—290 

Anacharsis 94, 340 

Anacoluthon 91, 92 

Anaxinus Io1, 280 

Antiphon condemned 96—98, 269, 270 

Aphobetus, brother of Aesch. 221, 262 

Aphobus 235, 236 

Apollo, πατρῷος of Athens 105 

Arbela, battle of 225 

Arbiters, public 128 

Arcadians 21, 49 

Areopagus 97, 98, 99, 270 

Aristides 165 

Aristodemus 23, 243 

Aristoleos of Thasos 140 

Aristonicus 60, 87, 159 

Aristophon 53, 119, 157 

Aristotle quoted 50, 51, 145, 151, 1933 
birth 234; tutor of Alexander 275 5 
in Athens in 330 B.C, 225; death 305 

Aristratus, of Sicyon 41, 207; of Naxos 
140 

Armpitting, Kittredge on 208 

Artemisium 148 

Assembly (Athenian), two meetings to 
discuss peace in 346 B.C. 250—257 

Athenian Confederacy (New) 230 


δ τ δ σαι 


ENGLISH INDEX. 


Athens and Philip at war (340 8.6.) 
282—284 | 

Atrometus, father of Aesch. 93, 94, 95 

Attic year 305—307 


B 
Boeotians, ἀναισθησία and dvadynola of 
33 
Byzantium 58, 62, 63, 64, 163, 230, 277, 
~ 282 


C 


Callias of Chalcis 59, 167, 274, 275, 278; 
embassies to Pelopon. w. Demosth. 278 

Callisthenes, decree of 34, 264 

_ Callistratus, heard by Demosth. 71, 156 

Cephalus 157, 176 

Cephisophon 24, 56 

Cersobleptes 171, 259, 278 

Chaeronea, battle of 49, 170, 186, 294, 
295; panic in Athens following 295 ; 
measures of Hyperides, Lycurgus, and 
Demosthenes after 295, 296; eulogy 
of Dem. upon heroes of 199, 200, 299 

Chares 108, 282, 283 

Charidemus 83 

Chersonese 58, 229; ravaging of 102; 
Demosth. speech on 276 

‘Chios 165, 230 

Cirrha, plain of 111, 289 

Clepsydra, 103 

Climax, example of 130 

Clitarchus of Eretria 274; killed 280 

Collytus 131 

Corcyra 165, 167 

Corinthian War 67, 68, 69; battle of 
Corinth 69 

Corinthians 166 

Cos 230 

Cottyphus 113, 291 

Cresphontes 131 

Ctesiphon (envoy to Philip) 242, 247 

Ctesiphon (defendant in case of the 
Crown) 18, 45, 328 

Curses in Senate and Assembly 95, 197 

Cybele 181 

Cyrsilus 144, 145 


365 


D 


Decelean War 69 

Delian contest at Delphi go, 91, g8— 
100 

Delphi, temple of, pillaged by Phocians 
232, 246; destroyed about 373 B.Cc., 
rebuilt before 330 B.c. 287, 288. In- 
scriptions recently found 265, 266, 287, 
288. See Phocians 

Demades, envoy to Philip 197, 
peace of 297, 298 

Demomeles 159 

Demosthenes: birth 234; father’s death 
234; under guardians 235; consults 
Isaeus 235; suit against Aphobus 235, 
236; compelled to assume trierarchy 
235, 236; suit ag. Onetor 236, 237; 
voluntary trierarch 71; speeches ag. 
Androtion, Leptines, Timocrates, and 
Aristocrates 237, 224-526; on Sym- 
mories and for Megalopolis 237; First 
Philippic 46, 102, 206, 238, 241; 
speech for Rhodians 238, 239 ; assault- 
ed by Midias 239, 240, suit and speech 
ag. Midias 240; Olynthiacs 241, 242; 
twice Senator 26, 243, 2573; envoy 
to Philip 247; speech before Philip 
249; 2nd embassy to Philip 257—26r ; 
ransoms prisoners 259, 260; Second 
Philippic 58, 102, 268, 269; arrests 
Antiphon 269, 270; speech on the 
Peace 267, 268; deputy to Amphict. 
Council 270; opposes Python 270, 
271; discusses Philip’s letter 273; in- 
dicts Aeschines for παραπρεσβεία Es- 
say 1V.; opposes Philip in Euboea 
2743 mission to Corinth and Achaea 
275; speech on Chersonese 276; Third 
Philippic 58, 276, 277; embassy to 
Byzantium 277; embassies to Pelopon. 
(w. Callias) and formation of league 
ag. Philip 278, 279; frees Euboea 
from tyrants 279, 280; arrests Ana- 
xinus 280, 281; receives thanks and 
crowns from Byzantium and Perinthus 
284; trierarchic reform 73—78, 285 ; 
speech after seizure of Elatea 126— 


199 ; 


366 


130, 292, 293; negotiations with Thebes 
293 ; energy after Chaeronea 295, 296, 
delivers eulogy on the fallen 199, 299; 
speech on the Crown 299, Essays I. 
and III. Later events (330—322 B.C.) 
305. Death at Calauria 305 

Dercylus 263 

Dexileos, monument of, w. 
69 

_Diondas 158, 174 


inscription 


Dionysiac Theatre 28, 29 

Diopithes 53 

Diotimus 83 

Documents in text of Dem. 351—355 
Dodona, oracle of 178 


Dorpfeld on brick walls of Troy, Athens, | 


Cle ΤΟΥ 211 

Dorpfeld and Reisch on Dionys. Theatre 
28, 29 

Doriscus 27, 52 


E 


Elatea, seizure of 106, 113, I14, 119, 
ΓΟ 202 

Eleusis, brick walls of 211 

Embassies of Athens to Philip (346 B.c.): 
First 248—250; Second 257—261; 
Third (to Thermop.) 262, 263, returns 
to Athens 263, sent again to Philip 
264 

Empusa 95, 96 

Epaminondas 21, 70, 229 

Epigram on heroes of Chaeronea (not 
genuine) 202—204 

Epilogue, Aristotle on 209, 313 

Euboea 53, 54, 58, 68, 165, 166, 212, 
229, 239, 274, 279, 280 

Eubulides, speech against 97 

Eubulus 24, 53, 119, 238; 
against Philip 244, 245 

Eudicus 40 

Eueratus 243 

Euphraeus 274 

Euripides: Hec. 
lephus 54 

Eurybatus 25 

Eurydice (Philip’s mother) 249 

Euthycrates 40, 270 


w. Aeschines 


1—3 quoted 188; Te- 


ENGLISH INDEX. 


F 


Foreign policy of Athens 46, 217 
Fortune 147, 215; of Demosth. 
192; of Athens 177—1r79 


G 


Gildersleeve cited 21, 127 Β 
Glaucothea, mother of Aesch. 95, 181 
Glaucus 222 

Grain imported by Athens 62 

Greek League formed by Philip 298 


H 


Haliartus, battle of 68 

Halonnesus 52, 271—273, 281 

Halus and Halians 248, 253, 260 

Harmosts and Decarchies of means 
67, 68 

Hegemon 199 

Hegesippus 271—273 

Heliastic oath 8, 12, 88 

Hellespont 54, 163, 168, 282—284 © 

Hero Καλαμίτης and Hero Physician 94: 
Essay VI. 

Hieronymus 245 

Hyperides 60, 87, 99, I59, 173, 199, 
278, 280, 295 


190— 


I 


Tatrocles 243 

Illyrians 38, 171 , 
Infin. w. τό 8, 9, 61; in or. ob. 9 
Ionic and Attic alphabets 86 
Iphicrates 70, 248 

Isaeus 235, 237 

Ischander 245 


K 
Kings of Thrace 171, 277, 278 


L 
Lasthenes 40 
Leucadians 167 
Leuctra, battle of 21, 70. ‘‘Leuctric 
insolence” of Thebes 21, 70 
Long walls of Athens destroyed 68 
Lycinus indicts Philocrates 242 
Lycophron of Pherae 233 
Lycurgus (Athens) 28, 295, 296 


ENGLISH INDEX. 


Lynceus, verse of 189 
Lysander’s governments 67, 68 
Lysicles condemned 186, 213 


M 


Mantinea 21; battle of 70, 229; walls 
of 211 

Manuscripts of oration on the Crown 
Essay VII. ; stichometry in mss. of 
~Demosth. Essay VIII. 

Marathon, heroes of 147 

Mausolus of Caria 230 

Megalopolis 21, 70, 229, 237, 245, 268 

Megara 53, 54, 165, 166, 217, 269 

᾿ Melantus 174 

Messene 21, 70, 229, 268 

Methone 51, 231 

Midias 180, 235, 239, 240, 287 

Munychia 77 

Mysians 54 


N 


Nausicles 82, 83 
Neoptolemus 83; the actor 243 


O 


Oath by the heroes of Marathon 147 

Oenomaus 131. O0cn. ἀρουραῖος 169 

Olympias (Philip’s queen) 101, 275, 280 

Olynthiacs of Demosth. 241, 242 

Olynthus and Olynthiac confederacy 
231, 240, 241. Olynthus captured by 
Philip 243 

Onetor 236, 237 

Onomarchus. 232, 233 

Orators demanded by Alexander 36, 328 

Oreus and Eretria freed 58,-279, 280 

Oropus 71 


ii 


Peace of Demades 64, 297, 298 

Pella 51, 248, 259 

Peparethus ravaged 52, 281 

Perf. subj., opt., and infin. 24, 29, 30, 
Bar oo? 229, 130 

Perillus (of Megara) 41, 269 

Perinthus besieged by Philip 62, 64, 281, 
282 


367 


Peroration 226, 313 

Phalaecus 246 

Phalinus 71 

Phayllus 233, 246 

Philammon 222 

Philip II. of Macedon: succeeds to the 
throne 230; takes Amphipolis 231 ; 
Amphipolitan War w. Athens 231; 
founds Philippi, captures Pydna, Poti- 
daea, and Methone 231; interferes in 
Thessaly 233; aggressions upon Athens 
238; intrigues in Euboea 239; attacks 
Olynthiac confederation 240; takes 
Olynthus 241, 243; proposes peace 
w. Athens 242, 243; receives 1st em- 
bassy 248, 249; sends embassy. to 
Athens 250; receives 2nd embassy 
259, 260; march to Thermopylae 260, 
261; surrender of Phocians to 263, 264 ; 
celebrates victory in Sacred War 264, 
265; summons Amphictyonic Council, 
and is made a member 265; celebrates 
Pythian games 267; asks recognition 
of Athens as an Amphictyon 267; at 
peace w. Athens (346—340 B.C.) 268; 
intrigues in Peloponnesus 268, 269; 
sends Python to Athens 270; sends 
letter to Athens 271; supports tyrants 
in Euboea 274; enters Epirus 275 ; sub- 
jugates Thessaly 275; makes Aristotle 
Alexander’s tutor 275; attacks Cher- 
sonese 276; dispute about Halonnesus 
$71,-272,12873- 281: ravages Peépare- 
thus 281; besieges Perinthus and By- 
zantium 281, 282; letter to Athens, de- 
claring war 283; Scythian expedition 
284, 285; made general of Amphic- 
tyons in Amphissian War 291, 292; 
seizes Elatea 292; destroys Amphissa 
293, 2943; proposes peace w. Athens 
204 ; victory at Chaeronea 295; 
drunken revels after battle 200, 201, 
297 ; sends Demades to Athens 297 ; 
peace of Demades 297; assassinated 
305, 328 

Philistides at Oreus 274; killed 279 

Philochares, brother of Aesch. 221 

Philocrates, peace of 242—257 


368 


Philomelus 232 

Phlius 21 

Phocian (Sacred) War 20, 22, 33, 23%, 
232, 267 

Phocians plunder temple of Delphi 232, 
246; send envoys to Philip 259 ; sur- 
render Thermopylae to Philip 34, 263; 
punishment of 265, 266; records of 
payments of fine 265; remnant of, mur- 
dered at Elis 269 

Phocion 108, 197, 199, 239, 282, 294, 
297, 298 

Phrynon of Rhamnus 242 

Pindar quoted 208 

Pluperfect in -ew and -n 24, 25 

Platarchus of Eretria 239 

Pnyx 124 

Polybius 49, quoted 207 

_ Porthmus destroyed 274 

Potidaea 52, 231 

Prisoners ransomed by Demosth. 189 

Property tax 180 

Proxenus 246, 247, 258 

Prytanes, Proedri, etc. 123, 124 

Pydna 52, 230, 231 

Pythian games in 346 B.C. 267 

Pythocles 199 

Python at Athens 100, 2905 2971 


R 
Rhythm 7 
River battle 154, 293 


5 


Salamis 148. Ships in battle of 167 

Scythian exped. of Philip 284,. 285 

Senate and Assembly summoned by Pry- 
tanes 123, 124 

Serrhium etc. 27, 52, 259 

Simonides, epigram on heroes of Mara- 
thon 204 

Simus of Larissa 40 

Solon 12, 178 

Sosicles 174 

Sparta invaded by Epaminondas 229 

Statesman and συκοφάντης compared 134, 


135 


Roa Ἦν 
- 


ENGLISH INDEX. 


Subj. and fut. indic. contrasted 127; 


subj. and opt. 110 
Symmories, leaders of 74, 125, 180, 236 
Symmories, speech on 20, 46, 237 
Synod of allies of Athens 24; resolution 

of 253, 254, 257 

sh 


Talent (Attic), modern value of 234 

Taurosthenes of Chalcis 274 

Telephus 54 

Theagenes 211, 212 

Thebes after Leuctra 7o; feeling of 
Demosth. towards 20; coolness of 
Thebes and Thessaly towards Philip 
in 339 B.C. 108, 286. Thebes in 340 
B.C. 165; allied w. Athens in 339 
B.C. 292, 293; Athenian army in 153, 
1543 destroyed by Alexander 20, 36, 
328 

Themison of Eretria 71 

Theoric fund 81 : 

Thermopylae, Philip checked at 31, 82, 
83, 214, 233, 238, 2413 surrender of, 
by Phocians 34, 263 

Theseum 94 

Thrace, kings of 171, 277, 278 

Thracian gold mines 28 

Thrasybulus of Collytus 157 

Thrasylochus 235 

Timarchus, trial of 333, 334 


- Timolaus 40 


Toxaris 94, Essay VI. 

Triballi 38, 284, 285 

Tribute of Athens 165 

Trierarchs 71, 73,75. Trierarchic reform 
of Dem. 73—79 

Tromes (Atrometus) 95 

Troy, brick walls of 210, 211 


W 


War between Philip and Athens 22, 
231; renewed in 340 B.C. 55, 50, 
283, 284, 285 

Winter battle (339—338 B.C.) 114, 155, 
293 


CAMBRIDGE: PRINTED BY J. AND C. F. CLAY, AT THE UNIVERSITY PRESS, 


ἊΝ } s Y © 
7 - ᾿ a 

» 1 

> » ¥ 
~ Ἵ 
ὰ 
“ ἢ 

. # 
~ - 

ἜΨ ἢ ἠ 

᾿ τ0 > 
. 4." 

pf / 
.»: ee 
at 
Ϊ 

μά = 

é : 
.ν» ἡ δῷ 

4 = > \*% 

- Ξ 

hal = a - , 
᾿ Ἄν γῇ 
> one } ~ 
ν »“-ν be « 
μ᾿" ᾿ aah 
pe “ f 


“en 
*, 


oe: ie S$. FarenCe- 
Th=i Ph. 


i 
ν᾿ 
x 
iM 
] 


A Ν 
σὴν a 
‘ +) 
ὯΝ ἐν... 
᾿ ἱ , 
Γ 
ἷ ay 
ἢ 
‘ 
᾿ 
, 
7 
Pat 
7] 
t 
{ 
ὶ 
¢ 
ἊΣ t 
ν 
. 
ὃ t 
ni) 
° 
i 
‘ 
oat ᾿ 
ν +f 
ΝῊ 
AL 
3 Ae’ 
᾿ + ᾿ 
) 
ἣ Ζ 
if 7 
1 
δ ὴ 
‘oye 
᾿ 
: 
" a 
‘ . 
᾿ re 
ὃ - 
ι 
ἀπ, 
Wan 
7 . ᾿ 
i 
i S 
+f 
Ὑ 
τῆ 
Vex 
7} 
Ty et 1 
ἘΝ 
. rt f 
7 
7 
ΕἸ 
™e 
ῃ 
‘ 
’ 
͵ 
ν᾿" 


ν ΠΥ τὰ 
we Wo 
how es 
ΝῊ" 
ἊΣ 
ob 
Ὕ 


- Ἄν »" 
Sitka es 


5 BOSTON C 
| 3 9031 ΟἹ 


31 


lin 2", 
ae 


- a — 
ΤΑ ἢν ~ 
rey ‘ wry 
» s Li 2nar - é Mn 
ig τῆς 
=F δ τ δα er 
τ τον αν ᾽ 
: Ni 
Aare 
i ὁ 
iss, i fi 
a eS SS = — οτος ἐσθ 
φ 
Fs Pan εἶ : 
Fs Ῥ > ". 
2. & , 
Sie" femewear J a 
ὥ. oan 2 ἣ 


_ Boston College Library = 
Chestnut Hill 67, Mass. Ἐν 


Books may be kept for two weeks unless a shorter 
time is specified. 


Two cents a day is charged for each 2-week book 
kept overtime; 25 cents a day for each overnight 
book. 


If you cannot find what you want, inquire at the 
delivery desk for assistance. 


CAR ae 7 ) ; 
DEERE oot = : eit ; 
᾿ Hy So TG Aa bs φ ; 7 
jl no eae vk On hw et vee oe 
Kas ᾿ i ᾿ im > τος iy “ 
ee fae he νοι ae ἐν le oD »Ἥ ok vo * a 


~~ oe ~ 


_— - ee eye “ἂν 
«of ee > “ ΡΝ ἐν 
nt gy τ. : re J  σν- * 
OR. ot dt trace ny ee τὰκ et eras 
¥ - αι" 
ΕΣ - 
- ϑ 


.» 
ἜΑ Aint ἀπρρς, es ees 
. ae Ψ 

~ oo ae ee 

* 


-- ράνηνο: = 
thre ως AM AE B 
δ" ~ 
SM, 


ew a 
a te ame: 
Att whee 


ae ΥναΝ 


